UK pensions

[BritManToo]

53 minutes ago, Kadilo said:

The Uni’s decide and it’s still based on their grade results. 

University is a business, they want bums on seats, and the grade requirements soon drop when they have spaces.

And I doubt many of the new graduates will get company pensions or even government pensions.

 

The British government seems to be doing it's best to destroy ALL pensions in the UK.

I can't imagine what they're thinking, or maybe they don't care because none of them will be in office by then.

[bert bloggs]

On 7/27/2018 at 4:47 PM, BritManToo said:

I don't have any of those, rid myself of that particular millstone 10 years back.

Poor you ,i am si glad i have a loving wife ,kids and family that i love and all love me , believe it or not even my Thai family love me as i love them ,and no they never want money .

oh and by the way i thought this thread was about pensions .seems to have gone off track a bit mods .

[My Thai Life]

UK government pensions are paid out of current income to government, not out of invested payments that were made during working years.

 

The system is based on having a larger number of workers than retirees, as was the case for many years.  It was a boomer-period policy. Now that boomers have retired, are retiring, and will continue to enter retirement for just a few more years, this system is becoming increasingly untenable.

 

It is clearly not a sustainable system. There are a number of solutions.

 

1. Open the EU to Turkey (I remember Gordon Brown talking about this, but he may not have been the first). This proposal is no longer valid.

 

2. Raise the retirement age. This proposal is in progress.

 

3. Reduce or freeze the pensions payments. Also in progress.

 

4. Breed more. Brits and other advanced nations are not doing this. (Neither is Thailand as a matter of interest.)

 

5. Individuals to be self sufficient. This is not in accordance with my ideals of a progressive functional welfare state (which, after all, we Brits invented), but it is the one I have pursued over the last few decades.

 

I truly feel sorry for the post-boomers.

 

 

[nontabury]

4 hours ago, My Thai Life said:

This discussion has prompted me to fact check the history of "free" higher education (unis).

 

It was introduced in 1962 and terminated around 1990, so it was definitely a major boon for the boomers, including me.

 

I believe I was in the last cohort to benefit from "free" higher education prior to Thatcher binning it. Sadly 10 years later, the Blair regime merely fine-tuned Thatcher's  policy.

 

For those not academically inclined,  there used to be really excellent apprenticeships (the sort that still exist in Poland and Germany for example): these were also destroyed. 

 

The top priority for any country is surely to invest in its future skills - ie training and education for its young people.

 

I am sympathetic to people who object to such investments being made for people who are not really "British", but don't let that blind you to the fact that British governments of both persuasions are not interested in investing in British people. (No offence to the Scots, who seem to have maintained an excellent system.)

 

 

 

 I think we all know that too many people are now processed through the University system. Many graduating with a useless piece of paper, that will do nothing to enhance their employment prospects. While at the same time there is a shortage of certain tradesmen, such as plumbers who may earn in excess of £70,000 a year, much of it, untaxed.

Forget about the Scottish education system, in recent years, that has sadly slipped below that of the rest of the U.K.

[mommysboy]

2 hours ago, My Thai Life said:

UK government pensions are paid out of current income to government, not out of invested payments that were made during working years.

 

The system is based on having a larger number of workers than retirees, as was the case for many years.  It was a boomer-period policy. Now that boomers have retired, are retiring, and will continue to enter retirement for just a few more years, this system is becoming increasingly untenable.

 

It is clearly not a sustainable system. There are a number of solutions.

 

1. Open the EU to Turkey (I remember Gordon Brown talking about this, but he may not have been the first). This proposal is no longer valid.

 

2. Raise the retirement age. This proposal is in progress.

 

3. Reduce or freeze the pensions payments. Also in progress.

 

4. Breed more. Brits and other advanced nations are not doing this. (Neither is Thailand as a matter of interest.)

 

5. Individuals to be self sufficient. This is not in accordance with my ideals of a progressive functional welfare state (which, after all, we Brits invented), but it is the one I have pursued over the last few decades.

 

I truly feel sorry for the post-boomers.

 

 

'UK government pensions are paid out of current income to government, not out of invested payments that were made during working years.'

 

That's incorrect.  There is a definite pension account and it is still sizeable though dwindling.  It actually lends to other UK government accounts.  The pension is a scheme and is governed by the Pensions Act 2014.  Up until recently it has been tenable.  As you say, the Government has recourse to raise ages or contributions. 

 

But I guess there could be many artful ways of avoiding responsibility.  And that must be something of a concern over the coming decades, particularly to expats since nobody is much concerned about them.  That is the worry; quite how big I don't know.

[nontabury]

3 hours ago, vogie said:

"Thank goodness for that too because some go on to be doctors, etc"

 

What percentage go on to become doctors, any evidence, I would have thought you had more chance of working in a coffee bar etc.

 

You obviously can't see the point I am trying to make. Don't you think that there are too many students going to university, don't you think more emphasis should put on colleges, we can't all be doctors?

 

4% in the 60s, 40% now, the 40% might think they are special, but they're not, even if their mothers think so.

Actually the U.K is not training enough doctors. From my memory, so not forced to be exact figures. We need 8,500 trained docs every year, yet we only train 6,000

Most of the shortfall is made up of by recruiting foreign doctors, the majority being from S.E Asia. But what I find most shocking from these figures is that the U.K. rejects applications from thousand of U.K. students, who do possess the required educational standard to become doctors. The reason being the cost of their training. However many of these failed applicants are now completing their doctors training in other countries, mainly Eastern Europe, at their own cost. And in many instances at a lower cost,then it is to train them in the U.K.

££££££

 

[My Thai Life]

@mummmysboy

"That's incorrect.  There is a definite pension account and it is still sizeable though dwindling.  It actually lends to other UK government accounts."

 

I was a manager in the pensions industry when the Thatcher reforms came into place.  I had something like 13 billion under management. Back in the late 80's, early 90's.

 

It's not something I know about through hearsay or forums.

 

Obviously there is a government pensions account. That's how accountancy works.

[mommysboy]

48 minutes ago, My Thai Life said:

@mummmysboy

"That's incorrect.  There is a definite pension account and it is still sizeable though dwindling.  It actually lends to other UK government accounts."

 

I was a manager in the pensions industry when the Thatcher reforms came into place.  I had something like 13 billion under management. Back in the late 80's, early 90's.

 

It's not something I know about through hearsay or forums.

 

Obviously there is a government pensions account. That's how accountancy works.

Ok. But I mean that it is quite definitely a Pension scheme that is governed by The Pensions Act (2014). Inevitably, just because that's the way governments are, it becomes  hand to mouth.  And people are quite right to speculate on its future form.  In fact it should worry us all imo.

 

I only wanted to point this out because some people on this forum thought that it was a means tested benefit, and that there was no real obligation to pay money, ie, no link between contributions made and payments received.  

 

[billd766]

6 hours ago, mommysboy said:

I don't think there are figures, but a youngster leaving school today will be paying tax for 40-50 years, possibly more.  That's the basis of my claim.  They are also saddled with enormous public debt, partly arising from the financial collapse of 2008.  There has to be big hikes in taxes to pay for the UK pension, health, and social services.

 

It is just a fact of life that in order to have a good career that pays a decent wage then you'll likely need a university education, which will be self funded.

 

Another example: when I grew up we had a council house, with a front and back garden. Dad was a hard working blue collar worker.  In those days that was enough to allow mum to stay at home for a few years to bring up us kids. What chance of this now? Both parents will likely be working.

 

I left school in 1959 at age 15 1/2 and started paying tax on my first weeks salary and now 59 years later I am STILL paying tax and will be until the day that I die.

 

Your parents were lucky in that they had a council house. My parents didn't. All their married life from 1924 until 1973 when my Mum died they lived in private rented accommodation. They paid all their bill but could never save enough money to buy a house.

 

Please tell me the difference between my parents and today's generation? They both left school at 13 or 14. My Mum went into "service" and I think he used to drive a horse and cart for a while but I can only remember him as a road sweeper. There was no further education, free or paid in those days, certainly not for the likes of my parents.

[mommysboy]

1 minute ago, billd766 said:

 

I left school in 1959 at age 15 1/2 and started paying tax on my first weeks salary and now 59 years later I am STILL paying tax and will be until the day that I die.

 

Your parents were lucky in that they had a council house. My parents didn't. All their married life from 1924 until 1973 when my Mum died they lived in private rented accommodation. They paid all their bill but could never save enough money to buy a house.

 

Please tell me the difference between my parents and today's generation? They both left school at 13 or 14. My Mum went into "service" and I think he used to drive a horse and cart for a while but I can only remember him as a road sweeper. There was no further education, free or paid in those days, certainly not for the likes of my parents.

 

Exactly you are making the point yourself- we are going back to the bad old days!

 

 

[nong38]

6 hours ago, mommysboy said:

A good, real life example, that is by no means uncommon.

If you moved to other parts of the country there are cheaper houses to be bought, Brighton is expensive as are many places by the sea, but thats your choice isnt it? Have a look at house prices in Newark for example.

Years ago I went to see Forest play the Hammers and sat next to a Hammers fan, he told me he sold up in East London and managed to buy a 4 bedroom fully detached house in Nottingham he was very happy with his decision and he could  see the Hammers turned over every year?.

When I bought my first house at the end of the first week in the place I had 6 shillings in my pocket, it was tough but it got easier with time, but no visits to Wetherspoons, no new car, no foreign holidays, no colour TV even to rent, gave up a lot to get on the housing ladder then. Today yes its worse thats why maybe you need to look at property prices and employment  in other areas. But many just dont want to get on their bikes, maybe still live at home with M &D and as ever Friday night is where the weekend starts, money is no object, life is all about choices and whats important to you wsp when you are young and retirement is so far away why bother thinking about it after all the "state" will always look after me, thats a common view I have heard.

[My Thai Life]

@ Billd you really warmed the cockles. My grandad was a fruit and veg trader. He took his horse and cart from Paddington to Covent Garden every day. That was before the Krays were demanding ransom to park your car in Covent Garden. Watching the Harry Potter and 007 scenes, and so many others set in CG, Hitchcock... you know ... 

 

 

[billd766]

2 minutes ago, mommysboy said:

 

Exactly you are making the point yourself- we are going back to the bad old days!

 

 

 

Not really. You are complaining that the youth of today may have to pay for their further education and I am trying to point out that in the bad old days as you call them people simply got on with life without expecting somebody to hold their hand, blow their nose and wipe their a** for them.

 

I had 3 jobs after I left school before I joined the RAF. I did 25 years there, came out to a crap job that I quit 7 months later, worked for the government as a Home Office radio engineer taking a pay cut each time. Quit that and worked at Vodafone for a year. Loads of money but I was working a 60 to 70 hour week and 2 weekends a month.

 

I quit that after a year as I was getting burnt out and went to work for Motorola doing a similar job. After 3 years Motorola lost the contract all the field engineers were given the option of a job in the factory 70 miles from where I lived, redundancy or work offshore. I chose the offshore option and worked another 7 years before I quit and went self employed contracting and I ran 2 companies of my own.

 

I am nothing special, no degree or anything but I figure that if I can do it almost anybody can.

[nong38]

When I was 14 I did a paper round, then I was telegram man and in the evening I worked on the bingo, bit of a shock when I passed the entrance to Technical College and the jobs had to go! Weekends were spent down the amusements winning on the slot machines, when you have worked out how the machines work and what the combinations are it was easy money (but all in pennies?). The University of LIFE, always learning, thinking ahead, preparing for the future.

Bit of light relief now Arsenal beat PSG tonight in Singapore 5-1 and Hamilton on pole in Hungary, he will be happy he is Gunner as well!

[mommysboy]

16 minutes ago, nong38 said:

If you moved to other parts of the country there are cheaper houses to be bought, Brighton is expensive as are many places by the sea, but thats your choice isnt it? Have a look at house prices in Newark for example.

Years ago I went to see Forest play the Hammers and sat next to a Hammers fan, he told me he sold up in East London and managed to buy a 4 bedroom fully detached house in Nottingham he was very happy with his decision and he could  see the Hammers turned over every year?.

When I bought my first house at the end of the first week in the place I had 6 shillings in my pocket, it was tough but it got easier with time, but no visits to Wetherspoons, no new car, no foreign holidays, no colour TV even to rent, gave up a lot to get on the housing ladder then. Today yes its worse thats why maybe you need to look at property prices and employment  in other areas. But many just dont want to get on their bikes, maybe still live at home with M &D and as ever Friday night is where the weekend starts, money is no object, life is all about choices and whats important to you wsp when you are young and retirement is so far away why bother thinking about it after all the "state" will always look after me, thats a common view I have heard.

It was an absolute comparison that can not be argued with.  If you start talking about properties somewhere else then you are not comparing like for like.  

[nong38]

Just now, mommysboy said:

It was an absolute comparison that can not be argued with.  If you start talking about properties somewhere else then you are not comparing like for like.  

Property is property is just cheaper in some places than others, the question then is can you live somewhere else like Cornwall in the winter, its different to the summer, its cold and its damp, that is your choice. Life is about choices just make sure you make them work for you.

[mommysboy]

13 minutes ago, billd766 said:

 

Not really. You are complaining that the youth of today may have to pay for their further education and I am trying to point out that in the bad old days as you call them people simply got on with life without expecting somebody to hold their hand, blow their nose and wipe their a** for them.

 

I had 3 jobs after I left school before I joined the RAF. I did 25 years there, came out to a crap job that I quit 7 months later, worked for the government as a Home Office radio engineer taking a pay cut each time. Quit that and worked at Vodafone for a year. Loads of money but I was working a 60 to 70 hour week and 2 weekends a month.

 

I quit that after a year as I was getting burnt out and went to work for Motorola doing a similar job. After 3 years Motorola lost the contract all the field engineers were given the option of a job in the factory 70 miles from where I lived, redundancy or work offshore. I chose the offshore option and worked another 7 years before I quit and went self employed contracting and I ran 2 companies of my own.

 

I am nothing special, no degree or anything but I figure that if I can do it almost anybody can.

No, I am not.   And no, you would likely not even get any of these options these days. The jobs simply aren't there....not ones that pay a decent wage anyway.  That's the point... you lived during times of real opportunity... most youngsters even if they get a decent job can't afford a house, etc.

[VBF]

45 minutes ago, mommysboy said:

I only wanted to point this out because some people on this forum thought that it was a means tested benefit, and that there was no real obligation to pay money, ie, no link between contributions made and payments received.  

 

If I understand you correctly (?) you're saying that there IS a link between contributions made and payments received.  

This is correct because the number of qualifying years that you have contributed  decides the amount of pension you receive up to a maximum of (I think) 30 years. After that, any further contributions one makes go into the general pot.

 

Personally, with 40 years in my particular "bin" I see that as unfair, but that's how it is.

[mommysboy]

13 minutes ago, nong38 said:

Property is property is just cheaper in some places than others, the question then is can you live somewhere else like Cornwall in the winter, its different to the summer, its cold and its damp, that is your choice. Life is about choices just make sure you make them work for you.

Again.  it was an absolute, real life comparison that can not be argued with.  The point appears lost on you.

[mommysboy]

4 minutes ago, VBF said:

If I understand you correctly (?) you're saying that there IS a link between contributions made and payments received.  

This is correct because the number of qualifying years that you have contributed  decides the amount of pension you receive up to a maximum of (I think) 30 years. After that, any further contributions one makes go into the general pot.

 

Personally, with 40 years in my particular "bin" I see that as unfair, but that's how it is.

Yes, and yes, it is rather unfair that some will pay more than the current 35.  

[VBF]

4 hours ago, My Thai Life said:

5. Individuals to be self sufficient. This is not in accordance with my ideals of a progressive functional welfare state (which, after all, we Brits invented), but it is the one I have pursued over the last few decades.

 

I truly feel sorry for the post-boomers.

No 5 is most definitely an option....BUT......it needs to be opted for when one is young and BEFORE one has contributed  into the Government "pot"

In other words, if one is allowed to and decides to opt out at say, age 20, with no expectation of a State pension and sorts one's own affairs out, that would be fine.

However for those who contribute for 20, 30, 40 years to THEN be told, "sorry, no money" is monstrously wrong.

 

I shall (hopefully!!!) get my State Pension in 3 years for which I've well and truly contributed, but have also been doing my own investments for several decades. On its own the SP is NOT going to provide me with any sort of quality of life; as it is, I shall see it as an addition to my own endeavours, but I repeat that, having contributed for 40 years, I'm damn well entitled to my SP!

 

Having said that, I too feel sorry for the post-boomers - me being a boomer, as it were.

[vogie]

12 minutes ago, mommysboy said:

No, I am not.   And no, you would likely not even get any of these options these days. The jobs simply aren't there....not ones that pay a decent wage anyway.  That's the point... you lived during times of real opportunity... most youngsters even if they get a decent job can't afford a house, etc.

Do you think if they dropped their lifestyle a little bit, like big fancy holidays, iphones, new cars with expensive insurance, benders all weekend and all the high tech gadgets they might be able to afford a deposit on a house, I do. We couldn't afford any of these, any that were around to buy anyway. Anybody that tells me that we were better off, well I just don't believe them.

[VBF]

9 minutes ago, vogie said:

Do you think if they dropped their lifestyle a little bit, like big fancy holidays, iphones, new cars with expensive insurance, benders all weekend and all the high tech gadgets they might be able to afford a deposit on a house, I do. We couldn't afford any of these, any that were around to buy anyway. Anybody that tells me that we were better off, well I just don't believe them.

The whole attitude is different today compared to what I learned from my parents. I was told to save for the goodies not just borrow or flash the plastic and the only loan I've ever had was a mortgage - if I couldn't afford a big flash car, I had a little one.....but I, not a finance company owned it!

People today have a sense of "entitlement" to  enjoy the goods /services you mention.

 

Rightly or wrongly is not easy to decide, but you're right - "we" were not better off - but we had to manage things better.  (As an  aside, when i was paying my mortgage in the eighties, the rate was over 13%....but we are wandering away from the Pension topic.)

[My Thai Life]

Mummysboy said

"The jobs simply aren't there....not ones that pay a decent wage anyway.  That's the point... you lived during times of real opportunity... most youngsters even if they get a decent job can't afford a house, etc."

 

Q1 Actually  the jobs are there if you have the right qualifications. Do you have any qualifications?

 

Q2 Decent salary? Excellent salaries if you have the right qualifications.

 

Forgive me for asking – but your recent postings on the teacher forum suggest that you are not qualified to work as a teacher here; do you have any recognized quals for the UK or here?

 

House affordability - yes I agree (in the UK) up from say 3 times salary to 10 or 20 times. But you’re not in the UK, or are you?

[mommysboy]

29 minutes ago, vogie said:

Do you think if they dropped their lifestyle a little bit, like big fancy holidays, iphones, new cars with expensive insurance, benders all weekend and all the high tech gadgets they might be able to afford a deposit on a house, I do. We couldn't afford any of these, any that were around to buy anyway. Anybody that tells me that we were better off, well I just don't believe them.

No, I don't. Nor, do I accept your characterisation in the main. Sure, many youngsters cut loose for a year or two.  Buying a house is also a matter of obtaining a mortgage which is probably not possible if the shoebox you have your eye on is 8 times your salary.  Nurses, and even doctors, can't even get there.  

[mommysboy]

28 minutes ago, My Thai Life said:

Mummysboy said

"The jobs simply aren't there....not ones that pay a decent wage anyway.  That's the point... you lived during times of real opportunity... most youngsters even if they get a decent job can't afford a house, etc."

 

Q1 Actually  the jobs are there if you have the right qualifications. Do you have any qualifications?

 

Q2 Decent salary? Excellent salaries if you have the right qualifications.

 

Forgive me for asking – but your recent postings on the teacher forum suggest that you are not qualified to work as a teacher here; do you have any recognized quals for the UK or here?

 

House affordability - yes I agree (in the UK) up from say 3 times salary to 10 or 20 times. But you’re not in the UK, or are you?

Yes I have a degree and am a qualified TEFL teacher.  I think you got that impression because now in Thailand one is expected to get a masters or similar in order to continue on a teacher's licence....for the same crap wage!

 

I'm not sure what point you are making. The discussion is primarily about the UK pension, which necessitates talking about other closely related matters within the UK.  So your questions did surprise me?

 

Regarding the availability of good jobs with decent salaries, well the actual facts rather speak for themselves. Earlier, I gave the example of my dad who was a blue collar worker who was able to support us in our formative years, whereas I would contend that is not possible these days.

[vogie]

4 minutes ago, mommysboy said:

No, I don't. Nor, do I accept your characterisation in the main. Sure, many youngsters cut loose for a year or two.  Buying a house is also a matter of obtaining a mortgage which is probably not possible if the shoebox you have your eye on is 8 times your salary.  Nurses, and even doctors, can't even get there.  

Are these your opinions or facts mb. Have you a link that states a doctor cannot afford to buy a house.

[mommysboy]

3 minutes ago, vogie said:

Are these your opinions or facts mb. Have you a link that states a doctor cannot afford to buy a house.

It was in an article I read some time ago in the Guardian I think. But picking on one example is annoyingly silly really: The fact is house prices have risen dramatically whereas salaries haven't.  

[My Thai Life]

@mummysboy

 

you seem to be seeking attention, living up to your moniker no doubt.

 

Do you have a question about UK pensions which hasn't yet been answered?

 

If you spend your working life inThailand as an unqualified "teacher" of English, or even as a qualified teacher, your UK pension will be zilch.

 

Anything else?

 

Oh, let me add to that. If you stay in the UK for the rest of your life, your govermnent pension will also be zilch.

 

 

 

 

 

[mommysboy]

8 minutes ago, My Thai Life said:

@mummysboy

 

you seem to be seeking attention, living up to your moniker no doubt.

 

Do you have a question about UK pensions which hasn't yet been answered?

 

If you spend your working life inThailand as an unqualified "teacher" of English, or even as a qualified teacher, your UK pension will be zilch.

 

Anything else?

 

 

 

 

 

I am keeping up my contributions to the UK pension.

 

I've actually done ok for myself- it coincided with leaving UK.

 

I have about 30 years paid up.

 

Yes. Am I right to factor in a chance that my UK Pension will be unpaid or at least reduced in some way? 

 

Could you possibly attempt to answer the question before you get off that high horse? ... as I think it's rather a long way down.