The 2015 Popularity Contest (aka UK General Election )

[Hellerad]

It's like Hitler accusing Islam of being anti semetic.

 

[Eggs]

...just watching a clip from PMQs where the PM is put on the spot about the latest immigration report which puts the Home Office in a bad light. As normal there is a blame exchange with the PM using the old chestnut of inheriting a mess. Regardless, the PM then goes on to say 'the British Public know who to trust when it comes to tackling immigration'.

What a statement that is given recent bi-election results and the flood of voters supporting UKIP. Amazing what these politicians say.

 

[neil999]

Labour calling the Tories incompetent when it comes to dealing with immigration, Jesus coming from the party that openly invited and flooded this country with the largest wave of immigration in this countries history in a completely unmanaged way.

Labour are NOT to be trusted anymore.

what laws did they change?

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Labour calling the Tories incompetent when it comes to dealing with immigration, Jesus coming from the party that openly invited and flooded this country with the largest wave of immigration in this countries history in a completely unmanaged way.

Labour are NOT to be trusted anymore.

Ok, lets look at the alternative (although I'm not convinced you'll listen to any actual facts on this).

In the 1950s, when the welfare state was bedding in, there were over 7 working people for every retiree in the country.

By 2015, even with the 'mass immigration', as you put it, that figure had more than halved to just over 3 working people per retiree.

Ok, so that's not a good picture. Now picture this. From 1990 to the present day, around half of the increase in the UK population has come about through migration. That means that the above picture would be even worse if it were not for migration, thus rendering the welfare state largely bankrupt.

This is especially so when you consider that the overwhelming majority of migrants are of working age, and actually in work.

Total population: 64 million
Working age population: 38 million
Of which are migrants: 6 million
Retired population: 11.1 million

So with the migrant population, we have 3.4 workers per retiree. Take them out and that drops to 2.8, and that's before you factor in the 15 million dependents that are below working age, in which case it would be one worker per dependent.

Now consider that there are several million that aren't working, so you have more people not contributing than are.

Does that add up to you?

 

[neil999]

so @Bruce Wayne your blaming the pensioners? lol

why do these old people keep living so long and being a drain on our resources ffs!

send them back to ermm...

 

[Bruce Wayne]

so @Bruce Wayne your blaming the pensioners? lol

why do these old people keep living so long and being a drain on our resources ffs!

send them back to ermm...

Kinda yes. It's a quirk of most democracies in that pensioners are nearly always the most active voters, so parties know full well they have to keep them happy.

Hence we get situations whereby pensions are kept behind rises in life expectancy, and the amounts continue to be very cushty indeed, despite the boomer generation enjoying the fruits of free university education, a booming property market and various other things that make them very well off indeed, yet we continue to pander to pensioners at the expense of children that tend to be saddled with 20k student debt plus the impossibility of ever owning a house. They're also far and away the most expensive portion of society in terms of healthcare, 'costing' something like 5 or 6 times your average working age person.

It's the ultimate example of rent seeking, but unless politicians significantly raise the retirement age, the working age population has to grow to support them. That either means we get busy having a lot more babies, which isn't likely, especially as working women tend to have fewer kids (and no country can do without the productivity of working women these days), or we have to import workers from abroad.

 

[L4Everton]

Ok, lets look at the alternative (although I'm not convinced you'll listen to any actual facts on this).

In the 1950s, when the welfare state was bedding in, there were over 7 working people for every retiree in the country.

What are the stats for living longer like in comparrison? What pension and contributions as well as state backed retirements by comparrison?
How many pension robberies happened inbetween (Maxwell for instance, Rover...) that have put people off saving, driven the property boom (then vs now) and so led to the situation where 'society' picks up the tab for elderly care because in the stupor of dementia or another illness the inevitable end arrives and the time spent waiting for it doesn't matter as its just another statistical burden on the NHS.

Is it possible to be over the same barrel twice? By that I mean drug companies charge fortunes for the latest and greatest illness fighting/life prolonging drugs so the NHS is squeezed again, and those making a fight of it and living that much longer are unable to pay for the drugs or the care anyway and so social care and the NHS get rinsed again.

Theres yet another report sugegsting dementia is the largest killer of women (or retired women) I haven't double checked just yet, and going on a tangent, is it possible to live right and maintain healthy brain function by lifestyle choice and avoiding things like smoking and drinking - or, at a genetic level - are some peoples brains (and the brain function) inclined to work at a reasonable level for longer compared to others.

 

[atrottel]

Great and pretty relevant article:
http://www.theguardian.com/news/dat...ou-are-probably-wrong-about-almost-everything

 

[Bruce Wayne]

What are the stats for living longer like in comparrison? What pension and contributions as well as state backed retirements by comparrison?
How many pension robberies happened inbetween (Maxwell for instance, Rover...) that have put people off saving, driven the property boom (then vs now) and so led to the situation where 'society' picks up the tab for elderly care because in the stupor of dementia or another illness the inevitable end arrives and the time spent waiting for it doesn't matter as its just another statistical burden on the NHS.

Is it possible to be over the same barrel twice? By that I mean drug companies charge fortunes for the latest and greatest illness fighting/life prolonging drugs so the NHS is squeezed again, and those making a fight of it and living that much longer are unable to pay for the drugs or the care anyway and so social care and the NHS get rinsed again.

Theres yet another report sugegsting dementia is the largest killer of women (or retired women) I haven't double checked just yet, and going on a tangent, is it possible to live right and maintain healthy brain function by lifestyle choice and avoiding things like smoking and drinking - or, at a genetic level - are some peoples brains (and the brain function) inclined to work at a reasonable level for longer compared to others.

I don't want to get into the rights and wrongs of pensions really, but there are a couple of things that are impossible really to refute. Firstly, as mentioned above, we have much fewer working people per retiree now than before. Secondly, each retiree is living approximately 15 years longer than they were when the welfare state was created. Thirdly, the elderly population cost a lot in terms of healthcare, and that cost rises the older they get.

Those are hard to really get away from. It contributes to the 65% of the welfare budget that goes to >65's, which contributes to a whopping 1/7 of all state spending (just the welfare part).

As I said, I'm not much interested in debating the rights or wrongs of that, but there's an expensive chunk of the population there that need paying for, which kinda means we have more babies, or we import more workers (or we make people work for longer).

 

[L4Everton]

I don't want to get into the rights and wrongs of pensions really, but there are a couple of things that are impossible really to refute. Firstly, as mentioned above, we have much fewer working people per retiree now than before. Secondly, each retiree is living approximately 15 years longer than they were when the welfare state was created. Thirdly, the elderly population cost a lot in terms of healthcare, and that cost rises the older they get.

Those are hard to really get away from. It contributes to the 65% of the welfare budget that goes to >65's, which contributes to a whopping 1/7 of all state spending (just the welfare part).

As I said, I'm not much interested in debating the rights or wrongs of that, but there's an expensive chunk of the population there that need paying for, which kinda means we have more babies, or we import more workers (or we make people work for longer).

We could have people start working earlier, young people, children people. Joking aside, where do child labour laws start and end and at which margins of Europe?
How do other European countries deal with their elderly population? And do they hold such political sway as is the case in the UK?

There has been a huge push for pensions, they are advertised daily, him from Dragons Den is on one such ad, I feel that at a time where standard of living is falling, and to afford that fall costs a lot more - huge swathes of the working poor are opting out or opting to contribute as little as possible to try to make ends meet today. Such a philosophy is being bred into said working poor because it is a way of thieving from their children as the burden of the parents is shouldered by the children.
What unemployment numbers would be required to bust the welfare budget mechanism required for the retired masses? If it was hit (the unemployed being of such a number that tax contributions fell and breadline payments grew) is there a contingency plan?

The EU fight is a massive one, is there the scope for the UK to be self sufficient? If the nation heads that way - would we all be at risk from one poor farming summer.

How much more margin is there for retirees in the current system before it breaks? can average life expectancy go up say on average another 5 years for men and women and would that mean retirement age rises from 67 as has recently been done (65 up to 67) or would the strain bankrupt the country/system and where to from there.
Just going on the numbers is all rather cold and calculated, its peoples lives that are being dealt with, and the care most agree retirees deserve. Is there an answer, or are we waiting on medicine to step in and make working into our early 70's the easy option.
Not an easy subject to address, let alone dream up resolutions for.

 

[orly]

Ok, lets look at the alternative (although I'm not convinced you'll listen to any actual facts on this).

In the 1950s, when the welfare state was bedding in, there were over 7 working people for every retiree in the country.

By 2015, even with the 'mass immigration', as you put it, that figure had more than halved to just over 3 working people per retiree.

Ok, so that's not a good picture. Now picture this. From 1990 to the present day, around half of the increase in the UK population has come about through migration. That means that the above picture would be even worse if it were not for migration, thus rendering the welfare state largely bankrupt.

This is especially so when you consider that the overwhelming majority of migrants are of working age, and actually in work.

Total population: 64 million
Working age population: 38 million
Of which are migrants: 6 million
Retired population: 11.1 million

So with the migrant population, we have 3.4 workers per retiree. Take them out and that drops to 2.8, and that's before you factor in the 15 million dependents that are below working age, in which case it would be one worker per dependent.

Now consider that there are several million that aren't working, so you have more people not contributing than are.

Does that add up to you?

do your figures there not confuse "working age" with "in work"? And aren't we working age at 16 (so may still be in education)

Ultimately I agree with you though, pensions are essentially unsustainable. Final Salary is the most amazing and at the same time preposterous thing I'd ever heard

 

[EverBlue86]

Agree on the elderly and the costs created from the increasing life span of people, but again my issue is that up and down this country in every estate, in every leafy suburb their are kids leaving school and not doing anything with their lives, put on the scrap heap before they even turn 18 ffs, if the government was more proactive and changed this countries outlook on employment (we are a lazy nation in comparison to society's such as eastern countries etc.) We could get many of our own into work without needing mass amounts of migrants, this will also in return lower the cost or supporting those amount of brit's living on income support. It's difficult and theirs no easy fix, but the government does nothing to try address problems, why not make it compulsory to enter into apprenticeships, college courses that are useful not film/media studies etc. From school rather than once year 11 ends do as you please

 

[Bruce Wayne]

We could have people start working earlier, young people, children people. Joking aside, where do child labour laws start and end and at which margins of Europe?
How do other European countries deal with their elderly population? And do they hold such political sway as is the case in the UK?

There has been a huge push for pensions, they are advertised daily, him from Dragons Den is on one such ad, I feel that at a time where standard of living is falling, and to afford that fall costs a lot more - huge swathes of the working poor are opting out or opting to contribute as little as possible to try to make ends meet today. Such a philosophy is being bred into said working poor because it is a way of thieving from their children as the burden of the parents is shouldered by the children.
What unemployment numbers would be required to bust the welfare budget mechanism required for the retired masses? If it was hit (the unemployed being of such a number that tax contributions fell and breadline payments grew) is there a contingency plan?

The EU fight is a massive one, is there the scope for the UK to be self sufficient? If the nation heads that way - would we all be at risk from one poor farming summer.

How much more margin is there for retirees in the current system before it breaks? can average life expectancy go up say on average another 5 years for men and women and would that mean retirement age rises from 67 as has recently been done (65 up to 67) or would the strain bankrupt the country/system and where to from there.
Just going on the numbers is all rather cold and calculated, its peoples lives that are being dealt with, and the care most agree retirees deserve. Is there an answer, or are we waiting on medicine to step in and make working into our early 70's the easy option.
Not an easy subject to address, let alone dream up resolutions for.

As you say, a very tricky topic really. With university and the like, it wouldn't surprise me if the average age to start working now is later than ever before, although I have no stats to support that. We've seen over the years how difficult it has been for any government to raise the retirement age. Heck, the French even took the ludicrous decision to reduce theirs.

The scary thing is that the states pension liabilities aren't even included in the debt figures that we hear about so often. If they were added on, it's said to add around £1 trillion to the government debt.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/legacy/t...n/2011/05/is_the_treasury_understating_p.html

Peston here argues that if a company accountant used the same method the state uses then they would quite probably be sent to jail. Which is comforting.

 

[Brennan]

Agree on the elderly and the costs created from the increasing life span of people, but again my issue is that up and down this country in every estate, in every leafy suburb their are kids leaving school and not doing anything with their lives, put on the scrap heap before they even turn 18 ffs, if the government was more proactive and changed this countries outlook on employment (we are a lazy nation in comparison to society's such as eastern countries etc.) We could get many of our own into work without needing mass amounts of migrants, this will also in return lower the cost or supporting those amount of brit's living on income support. It's difficult and theirs no easy fix, but the government does nothing to try address problems, why not make it compulsory to enter into apprenticeships, college courses that are useful not film/media studies etc. From school rather than once year 11 ends do as you please

Where's your proof for this like ?

 

[roydo]

do your figures there not confuse "working age" with "in work"? And aren't we working age at 16 (so may still be in education)

Ultimately I agree with you though, pensions are essentially unsustainable. Final Salary is the most amazing and at the same time preposterous thing I'd ever heard

And just one example of the Baby Boomers being probably the most advantaged generation in history. Its interesting, cod when they all pass on in the next 20-40 years, it will all go back to normal. The balance of workers and pensioners that is. This whole mess/expense will soon take care of itself.