Unsustainable public sector pensions

Unsustainable public sector pensions

Author
Discussion

Dixy

Original Poster:

2,912 posts

204 months

Thursday 26th November 2015
quotequote all
All public sector pensions should be closed today and current contributions protected. Salaries should be renegotiated accordingly and all should make their own arrangements from now on.

anonymous-user

53 months

Thursday 26th November 2015
quotequote all
Right you are, skipper.

dave_s13

13,813 posts

268 months

Thursday 26th November 2015
quotequote all
Err.... Cool story bro

iphonedyou

9,234 posts

156 months

Thursday 26th November 2015
quotequote all
What.

Mandalore

4,165 posts

112 months

Thursday 26th November 2015
quotequote all
Public sector pensions have been proven to be unsustainable for over 25years now, and they are still here.


UK Government Ltd is the countries biggest service company and even though it makes a huge annual operating loss, it can always rely on additional tax money or borrowing from international banks to fund the shortfall.


BY contrast, all the Private companies have been forced to drop Final Salary schemes and to fund the shortfall for the existing ones until those pensioners die - so as not to burden the public purse to look after them.


Its a tale of two classes, with the public sector workers being the toffs.

sherbertdip

1,097 posts

118 months

Thursday 26th November 2015
quotequote all
Dixy said:
All public sector pensions should be closed today and current contributions protected. Salaries should be renegotiated accordingly and all should make their own arrangements from now on.
Before spouting such ste why didn't you investigate current Public/Civil Service pension schemes.

They are now average salary, and depending upon which version can be had with or without lump sum, also contributions have been increased up to 10% of salary, lastly full benefits can be taken from age 65, not 60 as previously.

Lastly when you say "renegotiate pay" you do mean more pay to cover the increased costs don't you? Pay rise hahahahaha, haven't had one for 5 years, and not likely to get one either, but to compensate there are ways around it which means my pay has risen 30% over the past 3 years, and thankfully I'm still locked into a final salary with lump sum and will be retiring at 54 with plenty - keep on paying your taxes i've got a V8 to run on my pension.

vonuber

17,868 posts

164 months

Thursday 26th November 2015
quotequote all
Reforms enacted.

Next thread:
Look at these disgusting pay rises something needs to be done.

sidicks

25,218 posts

220 months

Thursday 26th November 2015
quotequote all
sherbertdip said:
Before spouting such ste why didn't you investigate current Public/Civil Service pension schemes.

They are now average salary, and depending upon which version can be had with or without lump sum, also contributions have been increased up to 10% of salary, lastly full benefits can be taken from age 65, not 60 as previously.

Lastly when you say "renegotiate pay" you do mean more pay to cover the increased costs don't you? Pay rise hahahahaha, haven't had one for 5 years, and not likely to get one either, but to compensate there are ways around it which means my pay has risen 30% over the past 3 years, and thankfully I'm still locked into a final salary with lump sum and will be retiring at 54 with plenty - keep on paying your taxes i've got a V8 to run on my pension.
I'm afraid you are quote wrong.

They are revalued average earnings schemes, typically included a lump sum and with higher accrual rates than under the previous versions.

Average costs is 35-40%, so 10% contributions don't cut the mustard anymore.



Edited by sidicks on Thursday 26th November 21:19

Johnnytheboy

24,498 posts

185 months

Thursday 26th November 2015
quotequote all
Final salary schemes should be closed to new entrants, and new defined contribution schemes brought in to replace them.

Magic919

14,126 posts

200 months

Thursday 26th November 2015
quotequote all
sidicks said:
I'm afraid you are quote wrong.

They are revalued average earnings schemes, typically included a lump sum and with higher a cruel rates than under the previous versions.

Average costs is 35-40%, so 10% contributions don't cut the mustard anymore.
Those darned cruel rates.

BoRED S2upid

19,641 posts

239 months

Thursday 26th November 2015
quotequote all
I'm guessing you don't follow politics then. The Tories have already addressed this and your post is complete nonsense. Next.

Murph7355

37,645 posts

255 months

Thursday 26th November 2015
quotequote all
Johnnytheboy said:
Final salary schemes should be closed to new entrants, and new defined contribution schemes brought in to replace them.
Just do like most private companies do and stop either the accrual or finally salary point for even current participants (or both. Think for my OH it was the final salary measure that was frozen). And replace the scheme with a defined contribution one (sidicks to correct terminology here as the pro in this area!).

Affordability isn't getting better on these. We need to stop pissing about with them and slam the door.

Too much feckin bleating every time a cut to expenditure is tabled. As a country we need to MTFU. A £10bn surplus by 2020 is good going with that backdrop. But any guesses on how long our debt would take to pay down IF that target is met....?

wiliferus

4,053 posts

197 months

Thursday 26th November 2015
quotequote all
Johnnytheboy said:
Final salary schemes should be closed to new entrants, and new defined contribution schemes brought in to replace them.
They went one better than that and closed final salary pensions to those already paying into those schemes, and replaced them with average salary schemes.

Dibble

12,923 posts

239 months

Thursday 26th November 2015
quotequote all
wiliferus said:
Johnnytheboy said:
Final salary schemes should be closed to new entrants, and new defined contribution schemes brought in to replace them.
They went one better than that and closed final salary pensions to those already paying into those schemes, and replaced them with average salary schemes.
And raised employee contributions from 9 1/2% to 14%...

Sway

26,070 posts

193 months

Thursday 26th November 2015
quotequote all
... Which is still a hell of a lot more than most people in the private sector can achieve. The levels of benefits is just ridiculous, even now.

Funny how a lot of people who support these mental public sector schemes party when taxes are increased for landlords. That route was the ONLY remotely affordable way to fund a reasonable lifestyle during my twilight years, and now there simply isn't a way for me to do so, having not been in a position to get any properties with decent equity prior to the changes.

So, I'll work and run a business for decades, and not have a pot to piss in when I'm old regardless of what I do, yet those earning significantly less and in most cases doing normal jobs (so not frontline police /firemen/nurses) have a lovely payment each month.

johnfm

13,668 posts

249 months

Thursday 26th November 2015
quotequote all
So, it's going slowly in the right direction, from totally unaffordable to grossly unaffordable.

Thankfully, size of state reducing from 46% to 36% over the next 5+ years. Who knows, may be enough real tax payers to afford it all.

sidicks

25,218 posts

220 months

Thursday 26th November 2015
quotequote all
wiliferus said:
They went one better than that and closed final salary pensions to those already paying into those schemes, and replaced them with average salary schemes.
Se my post above for the correction!

sidicks

25,218 posts

220 months

Thursday 26th November 2015
quotequote all
Magic919 said:
Those darned cruel rates.
banghead

beer

Randy Winkman

16,012 posts

188 months

Thursday 26th November 2015
quotequote all
Sway said:


So, I'll work and run a business for decades, and not have a pot to piss in when I'm old regardless of what I do, yet those earning significantly less and in most cases doing normal jobs (so not frontline police /firemen/nurses) have a lovely payment each month.
Do you think you made a bad choice of career then?

egor110

16,817 posts

202 months

Thursday 26th November 2015
quotequote all
Sway said:
... Which is still a hell of a lot more than most people in the private sector can achieve. The levels of benefits is just ridiculous, even now.

Funny how a lot of people who support these mental public sector schemes party when taxes are increased for landlords. That route was the ONLY remotely affordable way to fund a reasonable lifestyle during my twilight years, and now there simply isn't a way for me to do so, having not been in a position to get any properties with decent equity prior to the changes.

So, I'll work and run a business for decades, and not have a pot to piss in when I'm old regardless of what I do, yet those earning significantly less and in most cases doing normal jobs (so not frontline police /firemen/nurses) have a lovely payment each month.
So if the public sector pension is such a Big deal why not get a job in the public sector?

It's like me moaning I have to go out and work in all weathers, nobody is stopping me from changing jobs.