Current Affairs EU In or Out

[Joey66]

How many fireman or policemen do you know that still work on the frontline as they age versus moving into managerial roles? If we're judging someone purely on apparent physical capabilities, are we also thus excluding women from those roles? I'm sure most would say no.

If we think about it, the state retirement age was introduced at a time when not only did considerably more people work in manual work than do today, but the life expectancy was 20 years less. So we're working in jobs that are physically much less demanding and living a whole lot longer. What's more, there is also a considerably volume of evidence showing the benefits of work to our physical and mental health, which are absolutely crucial as we age.

It's also pretty irresponsible to expect a smaller number of working age people to pay for ones retirement than you yourself did. The baby boomers have already enjoyed the fruits of cheap housing and free tuition fees, now they expect the young to also pay for their NHS care. It does smack of 'I'm alright Jack', and tbh, this inherent selfishness is why the retirement age won't ever go up significantly, as every party knows full well that the elderly vote heavily and routinely kick up a fuss about anything that impacts them, so even though nearly all evidence advocates raising it, it doesn't get raised.

Hence we're left with the other two, but you've also pretty much squashed the immigration option...

So you are a roofer and you are expected to work on to the age of 70 years old Bruce?

 

[Old Blue 2]

How many fireman or policemen do you know that still work on the frontline as they age versus moving into managerial roles? If we're judging someone purely on apparent physical capabilities, are we also thus excluding women from those roles? I'm sure most would say no.

If we think about it, the state retirement age was introduced at a time when not only did considerably more people work in manual work than do today, but the life expectancy was 20 years less. So we're working in jobs that are physically much less demanding and living a whole lot longer. What's more, there is also a considerably volume of evidence showing the benefits of work to our physical and mental health, which are absolutely crucial as we age.

It's also pretty irresponsible to expect a smaller number of working age people to pay for ones retirement than you yourself did. The baby boomers have already enjoyed the fruits of cheap housing and free tuition fees, now they expect the young to also pay for their NHS care. It does smack of 'I'm alright Jack', and tbh, this inherent selfishness is why the retirement age won't ever go up significantly, as every party knows full well that the elderly vote heavily and routinely kick up a fuss about anything that impacts them, so even though nearly all evidence advocates raising it, it doesn't get raised.

Hence we're left with the other two, but you've also pretty much squashed the immigration option...

Cheap housing? 15% mortgage under Thatcher with a wife and two young children.

Sod off, Bruce, you really are taking the piss now!

YOURS is the generation that never had it so good...

 

[Old Blue 2]

Mate, you are right. Agree with that.

I personally think the high water mark on the retirement age has been met.

roydo, I think I've mentioned this before, but back in the 1980s when I was in the Executive grade (one below Management grade) I was involved in doing recruitment interviews. It was the crappest thing I have ever done. The recruitment boards I was on, we saw good kids, desperate for work (this was around the time when there were three million unemployed), giving really good interviews, and it was heartbreaking knowing that most would not make the cut. It was soul-destroying, believe me, and I'm not just saying that for effect, I'm totally serious. I've seen at first-hand the impact of the youth of a generation not getting a chance, and it's heartbreaking...

 

[Tubey]

Cheap housing? 15% mortgage under Thatcher with a wife and two young children.

Sod off, Bruce, you really are taking the piss now!

YOURS is the generation that never had it so good...

You're seriously arguing that housing wasn't considerably cheaper back then?

Because if so, you're, well, fabulously wrong.

 

[peteblue]

Yes it is received gross, but then it's taxed. They just take the money from elsewhere by way of the overall calculation.

Let me give you the example in simple, fantasy, figures.
Pre-RP
Receive = £10,000
Allowable income for tax purposes (say) = £5,000
Taxable = £5,000

With RP
Receive = £10,000
Receive RP = £5,000
Total new income = £15,000
Allowable income for tax purposes (say) = £5,000
Taxable = £10,000

Both at 20%

It's taxable, roydo, but not at the source of the RP. It's taxable at the source of the other income.

The tax authorities will tax your various incomes at different rates to ensure that the Total income minus allowances minus tax is the correct figure. For instance if you have private pensions from a number of sources, one might be taxed fully at 20%, another may have only half taxed at 20% and another at 0%, then when the state pension is added to this total, the tax will be worked out and deducted at whatever % either on the state pension or one of the others for ease of collection. The numbers will always add up and the appropriate tax applied. I have an accountant who does this for me and his numbers and the taxmans always agree........

 

[peteblue]

I think you'll find that he WAS. He was talking about others financially supporting us in our old age: "...Indeed, we need young folk of working age (which EU migrants overwhelming are) to support you, Pete and OldBlue in your retirement..."

Hence my reply.

Please read the posts correctly...

Nobody needs to support me, I have paid in far more than I will ever receive....

 

[peteblue]

You're seriously arguing that housing wasn't considerably cheaper back then?

Because if so, you're, well, fabulously wrong.

Incorrect. We’ve done this before. Mortgage rates today are a fraction of previous years and the percentage of monthly salary required to pay those mortgages is also a fraction of those required earlier. Do not confuse the price of housing with the percentage amount of salary, and therefore reduced disposable income, required to purchase and run a property.....

 

[Bruce Wayne]

So you are a roofer and you are expected to work on to the age of 70 years old Bruce?

You do something else Joe. The days of having one livelihood your entire working life are on the way out.

 

[Joey66]

You do something else Joe. The days of having one livelihood your entire working life are on the way out.

Very nice Of you Bruce so a tradesman qualified has to look for work after now 66 years old- laughable way of an argument!
Not practicle for artisan trades, just unbelievable quote that!
Just jump jobs instead of getting the contributions they have paid - yet your free movement they get benefits straight away PM tried to negotiate this away hemce he came back from the EU with a chamberlin piece of toilet paper- hence we voted out!

 

[peteblue]

You do something else Joe. The days of having one livelihood your entire working life are on the way out.

This is fine for educated people who may be able to either retrain, go private, or find niche work. What about this roofer that Joey mentioned, he’s a roofer.......

 

[Tubey]

Incorrect. We’ve done this before. Mortgage rates today are a fraction of previous years and the percentage of monthly salary required to pay those mortgages is also a fraction of those required earlier. Do not confuse the price of housing with the percentage amount of salary, and therefore reduced disposable income, required to purchase and run a property.....

Nice try.

 

[peteblue]

Nice try.

Hahahaha.......20-25%........most of us were spending 60-70% on housing.....

 

[Tubey]

Hahahaha.......20-25%........most of us were spending 60-70% on housing.....

Of course you were.

I get it though; disregarding stats is a Brexit supporters' specialty.

By the by, housing now costs over seven times the annual salary; that's more than doubled in the last 20 years alone. But I'm sure your mortgage was higher somehow, because Brexit means Brexit I guess.

 

[peteblue]

Of course you were.

I get it though; disregarding stats is a Brexit supporters' specialty.

By the by, housing now costs over seven times the annual salary; that's more than doubled in the last 20 years alone. But I'm sure your mortgage was higher somehow, because Brexit means Brexit I guess.

No, this is true mate. Back in 72, I was earning £100 per month and paying a mortgage of £64 per month. No bullshit.....

 

[Charlie Sweet]

The people who advocate the above have got their brains in their backside.

Implement that, and what have you got? You answer this, Bruce, before I give my answer.

I started typing an answer when I read Bruce's response below and I couldn't put it better although, to me, raising the retirement age is so fundamental to correcting the country's structural economic problems that it should be done much quicker than is presently envisaged (and to a higher age).

In reality, I would advocate a mixture of the three.

1) Raising retirement age makes sense as life expectancies have risen considerably over the last few decades, whilst retirement age has barely moved. This has obvious implications for funding the government as it increases the number of non-workers in relation to workers. It won't ever rise far enough for political reasons, but given the demographics of the nation, it's something I would do.

2) Fertility is a problem throughout most of the developed world, and whilst the UK isn't as bad in this regard as Japan, Italy et al, our birth rate is still below the replacement rate. More pro-fertility policies would seem to be sensible therefore.

3) I've advocated numerous times for open immigration policies. Society benefits enormously from diversity, whether from a cultural, intellectual or economic standpoint. As we're primarily talking economics here, the vast majority of migrants arrive as working age people and have a higher employment rate than the native population. They also statistically have fewer children and return to their homeland before they retire (the opposite of Brits retiring to Spain if you like). They're an economic boon.

Brexit will reduce #3 significantly, so that kinda leaves #1 or #2, but of course even if you implemented #2 today, it will take ~20 years before the children born today are economically active.