FabSwingers.com mobile

Join us FREE, we're FREE to use

Web's largest swingers site since 2006.

Already registered?
Login here

Back to forum list
Back to Politics

Pensioner household incomes higher than those of working age

Jump to newest
 

By *asyuk OP   Man
over a year ago

West London

After housing costs, typical pensioner households are now £20 a week better off than typical working age ones, according to the report.

Wow. I don't know if I even know how to process this from the Independent;

http://newscdn.newsrep.net/h5/nrshare.html?r=3&lan=en_GB&pid=14&id=448bbb47cdz_uk&app_lan=&mcc=234&declared_lan=en_GB&pubaccount=ocms_0&referrer=200620&showall=1&mcc=234

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"After housing costs, typical pensioner households are now £20 a week better off than typical working age ones, according to the report.

Wow. I don't know if I even know how to process this from the Independent;

http://newscdn.newsrep.net/h5/nrshare.html?r=3&lan=en_GB&pid=14&id=448bbb47cdz_uk&app_lan=&mcc=234&declared_lan=en_GB&pubaccount=ocms_0&referrer=200620&showall=1&mcc=234"
The baby boomer generation will be the last generation to be so well off.They are a burden on their grandchildren.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Its up to each individual to put away for pension and the government provides an excellent scheme for doing so,

.

anyone that does not take advantage, its their loss

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *abioMan
over a year ago

Newcastle and Gateshead

That is because of the triple lock on state pension......

At the moment each year the state pension goes up by either the rate of inflation, or the rate of earnings, or 2.5%... whichever is largest

So for example for the last 5ish years... where those in the public sector have been getting 1% increases.... pensioners have been getting 2.5%

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *asyuk OP   Man
over a year ago

West London

I was actually thinking that this was a very strange point for society to have come to.

Those working and raising children having less money than those retired and working part-time.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *abioMan
over a year ago

Newcastle and Gateshead


"I was actually thinking that this was a very strange point for society to have come to.

Those working and raising children having less money than those retired and working part-time."

It was done originally because it was only pegged to inflation and one particular year they only got a 70p a week increase

Now it's gone the other way....

A lot of people are advocating a double lock... tied to the higher of inflation or average earnings... at least that way they keep up with working people... because if you were to ask where the 2.5% figure came from nobody could tell you...

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Retirement: is the point where a person stops employment completely

.

A person may also semi-retire by reducing work hours, or taking on employment with less hours.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *asyuk OP   Man
over a year ago

West London


"

It was done originally because it was only pegged to inflation and one particular year they only got a 70p a week increase

Now it's gone the other way....

A lot of people are advocating a double lock... tied to the higher of inflation or average earnings... at least that way they keep up with working people... because if you were to ask where the 2.5% figure came from nobody could tell you..."

I guess that 2.5% has been the driver as wage inflation and inflation have been so low.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"

It was done originally because it was only pegged to inflation and one particular year they only got a 70p a week increase

Now it's gone the other way....

A lot of people are advocating a double lock... tied to the higher of inflation or average earnings... at least that way they keep up with working people... because if you were to ask where the 2.5% figure came from nobody could tell you...

I guess that 2.5% has been the driver as wage inflation and inflation have been so low."

could wage inflation be related to immigration?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *asyuk OP   Man
over a year ago

West London


"

I guess that 2.5% has been the driver as wage inflation and inflation have been so low.

could wage inflation be related to immigration? "

Yes. A lot of other things too.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *mmabluTV/TS
over a year ago

upton wirral

Pensioners deserve it if they have worked hard and paid into the system.

Those,however,who have spent most of there adult lives not working do not deserve this money.

The pension system is not a fair system

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *asyuk OP   Man
over a year ago

West London


"Pensioners deserve it if they have worked hard and paid into the system.

Those,however,who have spent most of there adult lives not working do not deserve this money.

The pension system is not a fair system"

They deserve to have more money than those who are currently working?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *abioMan
over a year ago

Newcastle and Gateshead


"

It was done originally because it was only pegged to inflation and one particular year they only got a 70p a week increase

Now it's gone the other way....

A lot of people are advocating a double lock... tied to the higher of inflation or average earnings... at least that way they keep up with working people... because if you were to ask where the 2.5% figure came from nobody could tell you...

I guess that 2.5% has been the driver as wage inflation and inflation have been so low.

could wage inflation be related to immigration? "

Not really in this case as there has always been immigration but were are living in times of historically low inflation

The original problem was that average earnings rises were outstripping inflation ( it actually is by a long way this year)

The problem is that basically since the banking crash the 2.5% is outstripping everything... and in times of austerity can you argue that one group of people should be doing so well off in real terms over everyone else

Hence the double lock talk instead

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *obka3Couple
over a year ago

bournemouth


"Pensioners deserve it if they have worked hard and paid into the system.

Those,however,who have spent most of there adult lives not working do not deserve this money.

The pension system is not a fair system

They deserve to have more money than those who are currently working?"

Its mainly because they dont have a mortgage or rent to pay and as many parents/grandparents help their kids onto the housing ladder etc I dont think the young are doing too badly and very few I know seem to save a penny but always manage to have holidays/new phones/meals out and new clothes.

As usual its a meaningless statistic based on averages

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"

It was done originally because it was only pegged to inflation and one particular year they only got a 70p a week increase

Now it's gone the other way....

A lot of people are advocating a double lock... tied to the higher of inflation or average earnings... at least that way they keep up with working people... because if you were to ask where the 2.5% figure came from nobody could tell you...

I guess that 2.5% has been the driver as wage inflation and inflation have been so low.

could wage inflation be related to immigration?

Not really in this case as there has always been immigration but were are living in times of historically low inflation

The original problem was that average earnings rises were outstripping inflation ( it actually is by a long way this year)

The problem is that basically since the banking crash the 2.5% is outstripping everything... and in times of austerity can you argue that one group of people should be doing so well off in real terms over everyone else

Hence the double lock talk instead "

they are hardly doing that well are they? So what are you saying, its fair to make everyone suffer? At least the young have the option of working a bit harder

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ixson-BallsMan
over a year ago

Blackpool

shouldn't you be comfortable income wise as a pensioner across the board?...unfortunately statistics are open to interpretation as to however you want to manipulate them.

many are comfortable, plenty are struggling

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *icketysplitsWoman
over a year ago

Way over Yonder, that's where I'm bound

The pension and other benefits pensioners receive is the biggest part of the welfare bill at 42%. Every other thread bemoaning welfare spending should remember this.

http://visual.ons.gov.uk/welfare-spending/

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *asyuk OP   Man
over a year ago

West London


"

Its mainly because they dont have a mortgage or rent to pay and as many parents/grandparents help their kids onto the housing ladder etc I dont think the young are doing too badly and very few I know seem to save a penny but always manage to have holidays/new phones/meals out and new clothes.

As usual its a meaningless statistic based on averages"

Just because we're discussing an average, it doesn't make it meaningless.

It's a fundamental change in society don't you think?

It's not the why that is of concern. It's the fact that those working have less money than those who have largely stopped working.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *icketysplitsWoman
over a year ago

Way over Yonder, that's where I'm bound


"

Its mainly because they dont have a mortgage or rent to pay and as many parents/grandparents help their kids onto the housing ladder etc I dont think the young are doing too badly and very few I know seem to save a penny but always manage to have holidays/new phones/meals out and new clothes.

As usual its a meaningless statistic based on averages

Just because we're discussing an average, it doesn't make it meaningless.

It's a fundamental change in society don't you think?

It's not the why that is of concern. It's the fact that those working have less money than those who have largely stopped working."

Plus the younger generation is needed to pay the pensions for those retired and provide their care.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *asyuk OP   Man
over a year ago

West London

Just for clarity, I'm not saying that pensioners are too wealthy and are rolling in cash.

I'm saying that something is going awry if those working have less.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"

Its mainly because they dont have a mortgage or rent to pay and as many parents/grandparents help their kids onto the housing ladder etc I dont think the young are doing too badly and very few I know seem to save a penny but always manage to have holidays/new phones/meals out and new clothes.

As usual its a meaningless statistic based on averages

Just because we're discussing an average, it doesn't make it meaningless.

It's a fundamental change in society don't you think?

It's not the why that is of concern. It's the fact that those working have less money than those who have largely stopped working.

Plus the younger generation is needed to pay the pensions for those retired and provide their care.

"

for some yes

for most; no

The state pension is a very small amount, most work and pay into private pensions all their lives and if luckily enough see retirement age, they can then sit back and reap the enjoyments of a well deserved retirement

I suspect many are envious of this and yet do not pay into a private pension or AVC's

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *andS66Couple
over a year ago

Derby


"After housing costs, typical pensioner households are now £20 a week better off than typical working age ones, according to the report.

Wow. I don't know if I even know how to process this from the Independent;

http://newscdn.newsrep.net/h5/nrshare.html?r=3&lan=en_GB&pid=14&id=448bbb47cdz_uk&app_lan=&mcc=234&declared_lan=en_GB&pubaccount=ocms_0&referrer=200620&showall=1&mcc=234"

Try reading the findings of the study. Basically, pensioners who;

Have paid off their mortgage

Have a company or private pension,

Draw a state pension, and

Still work

are better off.

The majority of pensioners aren't.

I've read the study, and its a bit like stating the bleeding obvious.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *obka3Couple
over a year ago

bournemouth


"

Its mainly because they dont have a mortgage or rent to pay and as many parents/grandparents help their kids onto the housing ladder etc I dont think the young are doing too badly and very few I know seem to save a penny but always manage to have holidays/new phones/meals out and new clothes.

As usual its a meaningless statistic based on averages

Just because we're discussing an average, it doesn't make it meaningless.

It's a fundamental change in society don't you think?

It's not the why that is of concern. It's the fact that those working have less money than those who have largely stopped working."

As the post above says, if you dont have a mortgage or rent to pay and have saved into a pension for many years its hardly surprising they have more cash, if you and clcc cant see that then perhaps you both need some more lessons in economics

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *oncupiscentTonyMan
over a year ago

Kent


"

Its mainly because they dont have a mortgage or rent to pay and as many parents/grandparents help their kids onto the housing ladder etc I dont think the young are doing too badly and very few I know seem to save a penny but always manage to have holidays/new phones/meals out and new clothes.

As usual its a meaningless statistic based on averages

Just because we're discussing an average, it doesn't make it meaningless.

It's a fundamental change in society don't you think?

It's not the why that is of concern. It's the fact that those working have less money than those who have largely stopped working.

As the post above says, if you dont have a mortgage or rent to pay and have saved into a pension for many years its hardly surprising they have more cash, if you and clcc cant see that then perhaps you both need some more lessons in economics"

Though it's easier to pay off a mortgage taken out at 3x earnings (try finding one of those today) and draw on a final salary scheme (try finding one of those too) without having to pay off higher education debt.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *andS66Couple
over a year ago

Derby


"

Its mainly because they dont have a mortgage or rent to pay and as many parents/grandparents help their kids onto the housing ladder etc I dont think the young are doing too badly and very few I know seem to save a penny but always manage to have holidays/new phones/meals out and new clothes.

As usual its a meaningless statistic based on averages

Just because we're discussing an average, it doesn't make it meaningless.

It's a fundamental change in society don't you think?

It's not the why that is of concern. It's the fact that those working have less money than those who have largely stopped working.

As the post above says, if you dont have a mortgage or rent to pay and have saved into a pension for many years its hardly surprising they have more cash, if you and clcc cant see that then perhaps you both need some more lessons in economics

Though it's easier to pay off a mortgage taken out at 3x earnings (try finding one of those today) and draw on a final salary scheme (try finding one of those too) without having to pay off higher education debt."

It's also a lot easier to pay off a mortgage at 2% interest.

Throughout the eighties and early 90s they were in double figures -I remember them going up to 17%. I had a £60K mortgage, costing £653 per month at about 12.5%. Nowadays for the £653 per month you can get about £170,000.

My Dad had a £7,000 mortgage on his first house - so my mortgage when I started out was about 9* more than his was. Same as if my son got a £540,000 mortgage now - which he doesn't need to!

Mortgages of 5 and 6 times salary were fairly common in the eighties - even mortgages of up to 125% valuation.

Plus there was also the endowment selling fiasco - which left a lot of people, after years of having a mortgage, having to pay extra off.

The thing with a mortgage is, aside from interest rate fluctuations, what you pay will not go up. Plus, the pain of what you're paying will decrease over the years as your earnings increase - whether through natural wage increases or promotions / job moves. And you'll eventually be mortgage free and £20 a week better off than your children.

Don't get me wrong - I wouldn't like to be starting out now - but maybe that's because I've already been through that pain once.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *asyuk OP   Man
over a year ago

West London

I am not wondering why this has happened. The mechanics of this is as clear as day.

I'm more interested in your thoughts about if it feels appropriate that those no longer working full time are EARNING more than those working.

The fact that they are wealthier makes sense, although those with property will help their children, further increasing wealth inequality into the next generation.

The fact that they earn more does not make sense for how a country and its economy functions. Not to me at least.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *andS66Couple
over a year ago

Derby


"I am not wondering why this has happened. The mechanics of this is as clear as day.

I'm more interested in your thoughts about if it feels appropriate that those no longer working full time are EARNING more than those working.

The fact that they are wealthier makes sense, although those with property will help their children, further increasing wealth inequality into the next generation.

The fact that they earn more does not make sense for how a country and its economy functions. Not to me at least."

Not sure that they're actually 'earning' more...

Are reporters getting confused between disposable income and earnings?

In a few years time, my disposable income will increase quite substantially due to my mortgage being paid off... whether or not my earnings increase or stay the same. And it will be by a lot more than £20 per week!

I'm also saving as much as I can in a pension scheme, and again, when I start drawing that down, my income will increase (given that I would still be working), even though I would potentially be doing the same job and earning the same wage.

Having said that, I will still have to work to help out our children (whether they ask for it or not)!

But apart from anything, even if the study is referreing only to earnings themselves, are you suggesting that pensioners should not be paid what younger people earn?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

So the average pensioner has world all of his life, payed a mortgage plus all of the bills and repairs to the house because they do not have a landlord to pay for the repairs for them.

And after 25-30 years they eventually pay it all off and then that are a whole £20 per week better off ffs

And if anyone can tell me who is average ?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *imiUKMan
over a year ago

Hereford


"Pensioners deserve it if they have worked hard and paid into the system.

Those,however,who have spent most of there adult lives not working do not deserve this money.

The pension system is not a fair system

They deserve to have more money than those who are currently working?

Its mainly because they dont have a mortgage or rent to pay and as many parents/grandparents help their kids onto the housing ladder etc I dont think the young are doing too badly and very few I know seem to save a penny but always manage to have holidays/new phones/meals out and new clothes.

As usual its a meaningless statistic based on averages"

Yeah, but you live in Bath.

The only city I have evder been to where the tramps are wearing clothes that are more expensive than mine.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *asyuk OP   Man
over a year ago

West London

Really?

Nobody thinks that this is odd?

That we live in a society where those working have less money to spend than those who aren't? This is a new phenomenon.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *imiUKMan
over a year ago

Hereford


"Really?

Nobody thinks that this is odd?

That we live in a society where those working have less money to spend than those who aren't? This is a new phenomenon."

I think plenty think it's odd.

There is a general feeling in my generation (X, just) that my parents generation (Baby boomers) has sold them down the river.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *asyuk OP   Man
over a year ago

West London


"Really?

Nobody thinks that this is odd?

That we live in a society where those working have less money to spend than those who aren't? This is a new phenomenon.

I think plenty think it's odd.

There is a general feeling in my generation (X, just) that my parents generation (Baby boomers) has sold them down the river. "

I don't think that it's deliberate or even foreseeable.

However we have gone from a single income allowing for a comfortable life to two incomes being a stretch. A guaranteed pension to one dependent on how the stock market was performing the day you cashed up.

We have more stuff, but I think the big money pit, at least in the South, is accommodation. The North hasn't had the investment it needed when old industry moved away.

None of it within the control of this generation.

The boomers have got very lucky, but how can it be evened out again? Should it be?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I work for the Citizens Advice in Glasgow and many people my age are living and working with incomes before rent/ mortgage etc that is less than a single pensioners state pension nevermind a couple with works pension topping it up

My father in law for instance has a final salary pension on top of his state pension. His mortgage is paid and he has no serious outgoings. He lives on £30,000 a year. Many of the people I see have young families and have joint incomes struggling to reach £20,0000 and have rent etc to come off that

Looking forward to bed by a pensioner just wished they would stop raising the bloody age

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Should read joint salary if £20,000 and not £200,000

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *andS66Couple
over a year ago

Derby


"I am not wondering why this has happened. The mechanics of this is as clear as day.

I'm more interested in your thoughts about if it feels appropriate that those no longer working full time are EARNING more than those working.

The fact that they are wealthier makes sense, although those with property will help their children, further increasing wealth inequality into the next generation.

The fact that they earn more does not make sense for how a country and its economy functions. Not to me at least."

Do you think those people over retirement age who are still working are being paid more to do the same job as people who are not yet officially retired?

You think that companies will say to their employees, " I know you're both 'fork lift drivers / admin clerks/ shelf stackers / whatever', but he's an O.A.P and you're not, so I'm going to pay him £20 a week more than you"?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *iamondjoeMan
over a year ago

Glastonbury

The country's fucked

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *asyuk OP   Man
over a year ago

West London


"

Do you think those people over retirement age who are still working are being paid more to do the same job as people who are not yet officially retired?

You think that companies will say to their employees, " I know you're both 'fork lift drivers / admin clerks/ shelf stackers / whatever', but he's an O.A.P and you're not, so I'm going to pay him £20 a week more than you"?

"

Actually, no. I didn't even imply that.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *obka3Couple
over a year ago

bournemouth

My heart bleeds for all the poor young things that the baby boomers have aledgedly done over, when I was growing up we were lucky to have a few days away at the seaside for a holiday, most passed clothes down from siblings/cousins and certainly didnt have things like electronic toys/computers/phones etc, lots left school at 16 and most by 18 to get real jobs, most pretty poorly paid and starting at the bottom, those few who went to uni did proper degrees not some bloody useless media studies type onesand as for a"gap" year travelling the world, our generation travelled the world courtesy of the armed forces if you joined up or were doing national service. We saved bloody hard to get where we are and lived in houses that wespent time and money doing up not getting the local builder to do it for us and the trouble is you young pups have life too easy from birth mortgage rates are at record lows so its much easier to afford one now if you have saved up( ask if you need to know what saving for something is)I accept rents are far too high but perhaps if many hadnt spent years doing crap degrees that have no hope of a job at the end but got a real job they might have a few quid put aside.

Christ what a bunch of moaning spoilt kids have we brought up

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *asyuk OP   Man
over a year ago

West London


"My heart bleeds for all the poor young things that the baby boomers have aledgedly done over, when I was growing up we were lucky to have a few days away at the seaside for a holiday, most passed clothes down from siblings/cousins and certainly didnt have things like electronic toys/computers/phones etc, lots left school at 16 and most by 18 to get real jobs, most pretty poorly paid and starting at the bottom, those few who went to uni did proper degrees not some bloody useless media studies type onesand as for a"gap" year travelling the world, our generation travelled the world courtesy of the armed forces if you joined up or were doing national service. We saved bloody hard to get where we are and lived in houses that wespent time and money doing up not getting the local builder to do it for us and the trouble is you young pups have life too easy from birth mortgage rates are at record lows so its much easier to afford one now if you have saved up( ask if you need to know what saving for something is)I accept rents are far too high but perhaps if many hadnt spent years doing crap degrees that have no hope of a job at the end but got a real job they might have a few quid put aside.

Christ what a bunch of moaning spoilt kids have we brought up

"

Actually, I didn't say that anyone has been hard done-by either.

Mortgages may be cheap but the cost as a multiple of salary is many, many times what it used to be so it is not even slightly easier to afford.

I am simply asking if you think that a society is functioning correctly if those working earn less than those who aren't.

Apparently you think it is and do not think this is an odd situation.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *obka3Couple
over a year ago

bournemouth


"

Actually, I didn't say that anyone has been hard done-by either.

Mortgages may be cheap but the cost as a multiple of salary is many, many times what it used to be so it is not even slightly easier to afford.

I am simply asking if you think that a society is functioning correctly if those working earn less than those who aren't.

Apparently you think it is and do not think this is an odd situation."

What I think is an odd situation is when people cant or dont know the difference between what people's income is and what they have left AFTER paying for housing costs, if I have an income of £100 a wk but have a paid for house and you have an income of £200 a wk and spend £120 a week paying towards a house who has a higher disposable income ?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *asyuk OP   Man
over a year ago

West London


"

Actually, I didn't say that anyone has been hard done-by either.

Mortgages may be cheap but the cost as a multiple of salary is many, many times what it used to be so it is not even slightly easier to afford.

I am simply asking if you think that a society is functioning correctly if those working earn less than those who aren't.

Apparently you think it is and do not think this is an odd situation.

What I think is an odd situation is when people cant or dont know the difference between what people's income is and what they have left AFTER paying for housing costs, if I have an income of £100 a wk but have a paid for house and you have an income of £200 a wk and spend £120 a week paying towards a house who has a higher disposable income ? "

You are correct. I am using the wrong definition. Those working have less to spend than those who aren't. That doesn't change my point though.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *obka3Couple
over a year ago

bournemouth


"

Actually, I didn't say that anyone has been hard done-by either.

Mortgages may be cheap but the cost as a multiple of salary is many, many times what it used to be so it is not even slightly easier to afford.

I am simply asking if you think that a society is functioning correctly if those working earn less than those who aren't.

Apparently you think it is and do not think this is an odd situation.

What I think is an odd situation is when people cant or dont know the difference between what people's income is and what they have left AFTER paying for housing costs, if I have an income of £100 a wk but have a paid for house and you have an income of £200 a wk and spend £120 a week paying towards a house who has a higher disposable income ?

You are correct. I am using the wrong definition. Those working have less to spend than those who aren't. That doesn't change my point though."

Of course they(workers) have more to spend they are spending it on buying/renting a house the retired dont need to as they are at a different stage of life.

Now if you say houses cost too much to buy or rent then yes I totally agree, the reason is that we have a huge shortage for several reasons , nimby's, planners and of course developers who have had to pay over the odds for building land that eventually gets permission in spite of the first two reasons. Untill we get more houses built housing costs will remain far too high, as plot values in most areas are pushing £50 to £100 thousand far more land has to be released to reduce this cost, of course those that own a house worth £300,000 will be really unhappy when it drops in value by £50,000 as a consequence. How we can solve this problem is far more important for the future of this country than the stupid arguments about brexit

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *asyuk OP   Man
over a year ago

West London


"

You are correct. I am using the wrong definition. Those working have less to spend than those who aren't. That doesn't change my point though.

Of course they(workers) have more to spend they are spending it on buying/renting a house the retired dont need to as they are at a different stage of life.

Now if you say houses cost too much to buy or rent then yes I totally agree, the reason is that we have a huge shortage for several reasons , nimby's, planners and of course developers who have had to pay over the odds for building land that eventually gets permission in spite of the first two reasons. Untill we get more houses built housing costs will remain far too high, as plot values in most areas are pushing £50 to £100 thousand far more land has to be released to reduce this cost, of course those that own a house worth £300,000 will be really unhappy when it drops in value by £50,000 as a consequence. How we can solve this problem is far more important for the future of this country than the stupid arguments about brexit "

No. I was asking if you think that society is functioning correctly if those who work full time have less money to spend than those who no longer do. You absolutely do not see this as a strange situation.

Accommodation is interesting. There used to be council housing available at a low rent in areas of high demand. Many of these were sold to residents at a considerable discount, making them wealthier even than those who earned more but had to buy a property privately.

Demand is not only being throttled by planning. There are hundreds of thousands of empty properties and land with planning permission undeveloped. Controlling the supply keeps prices high.

Lack of skilled labour also holds back development.

You are quite right, we shouldn't be diverting government resource into Brexit at all. There are far more important things. We are though. Lots of resource.

As I said earlier, the mechanism of why the retired more to spend is clear, but is that right for society?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"

You are correct. I am using the wrong definition. Those working have less to spend than those who aren't. That doesn't change my point though.

Of course they(workers) have more to spend they are spending it on buying/renting a house the retired dont need to as they are at a different stage of life.

Now if you say houses cost too much to buy or rent then yes I totally agree, the reason is that we have a huge shortage for several reasons , nimby's, planners and of course developers who have had to pay over the odds for building land that eventually gets permission in spite of the first two reasons. Untill we get more houses built housing costs will remain far too high, as plot values in most areas are pushing £50 to £100 thousand far more land has to be released to reduce this cost, of course those that own a house worth £300,000 will be really unhappy when it drops in value by £50,000 as a consequence. How we can solve this problem is far more important for the future of this country than the stupid arguments about brexit

No. I was asking if you think that society is functioning correctly if those who work full time have less money to spend than those who no longer do. You absolutely do not see this as a strange situation.

Accommodation is interesting. There used to be council housing available at a low rent in areas of high demand. Many of these were sold to residents at a considerable discount, making them wealthier even than those who earned more but had to buy a property privately.

Demand is not only being throttled by planning. There are hundreds of thousands of empty properties and land with planning permission undeveloped. Controlling the supply keeps prices high.

Lack of skilled labour also holds back development.

You are quite right, we shouldn't be diverting government resource into Brexit at all. There are far more important things. We are though. Lots of resource.

As I said earlier, the mechanism of why the retired more to spend is clear, but is that right for society?"

Yes. It gives the young something to aspire to and may make the thought of growing old less unpleasant/daunting. And shouldn't a society be judged by how it treats its most vulnerable/elderly?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Another thing is that yes maybe some of the older generation might have a higher incom because they have worked and saved ect.

But they will be spending it and paying back into the system and oh wait when they pop thier cloggs guess who usually ends up with the money? Yes the younger generation

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *obka3Couple
over a year ago

bournemouth


"

No. I was asking if you think that society is functioning correctly if those who work full time have less money to spend than those who no longer do. You absolutely do not see this as a strange situation.

You are quite right, we shouldn't be diverting government resource into Brexit at all. There are far more important things. We are though. Lots of resource.

As I said earlier, the mechanism of why the retired more to spend is clear, but is that right for society?"

Sorry but when you reach retirement and have paid off your mortgage and saved up for your oldage I think you will feel you have deserved your income and lifestyle and as has been said when the old die they leave their money to the next generation

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *asyuk OP   Man
over a year ago

West London

Let me restate this and see if I can better explain my point.

Should the most economically active in an economy benefit the most by having the most disposable income or not?

Should the majority of your wealth be based on the work you do or be inherited due to the riches, or lack thereof, of your parents?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Let me restate this and see if I can better explain my point.

Should the most economically active in an economy benefit the most by having the most disposable income or not?

Should the majority of your wealth be based on the work you do or be inherited due to the riches, or lack thereof, of your parents?"

might not the most economically active in an economy be the ones who have time to spend their money rather than being at work all day? I really don't see what you're getting at, other than sounding a little envious

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *asyuk OP   Man
over a year ago

West London


"Let me restate this and see if I can better explain my point.

Should the most economically active in an economy benefit the most by having the most disposable income or not?

Should the majority of your wealth be based on the work you do or be inherited due to the riches, or lack thereof, of your parents?

might not the most economically active in an economy be the ones who have time to spend their money rather than being at work all day? I really don't see what you're getting at, other than sounding a little envious"

No, I guess you don't. Don't worry yourself as long as you're fine

I am really not envious, but I do have some empathy and have some concern about the consequences.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Let me restate this and see if I can better explain my point.

Should the most economically active in an economy benefit the most by having the most disposable income or not?

Should the majority of your wealth be based on the work you do or be inherited due to the riches, or lack thereof, of your parents?

might not the most economically active in an economy be the ones who have time to spend their money rather than being at work all day? I really don't see what you're getting at, other than sounding a little envious

No, I guess you don't. Don't worry yourself as long as you're fine

I am really not envious, but I do have some empathy and have some concern about the consequences."

what difference does it make if I'm fine or not? Empathy and consequences? What are you on about? If you can't explain fair enough

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Let me restate this and see if I can better explain my point.

Should the most economically active in an economy benefit the most by having the most disposable income or not?

Should the majority of your wealth be based on the work you do or be inherited due to the riches, or lack thereof, of your parents?

might not the most economically active in an economy be the ones who have time to spend their money rather than being at work all day? I really don't see what you're getting at, other than sounding a little envious

No, I guess you don't. Don't worry yourself as long as you're fine

I am really not envious, but I do have some empathy and have some concern about the consequences."
The consequences are a disaffected generation X and generation Y .Who may or may not be willing to pay to support an older wealthier generation through higher taxation in their working lives.It really depends if they think life is good or not.Very subjective.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *andS66Couple
over a year ago

Derby

It's funny really, isn't it? The younger generation can't afford to buy a house - my son, for example, can't afford to buy a house.

But he has an Audi on the drive (£4K a year on tick), goes abroad on holiday twice a year (£3K a year), wears designer clothes, has sky tv in his room, and goes out with his mates twice a week.

And he's pretty average for the financial expectations of someone of his age.

Don't know many OAPs that have all of the above.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

[Removed by poster at 15/02/17 20:34:08]

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"It's funny really, isn't it? The younger generation can't afford to buy a house - my son, for example, can't afford to buy a house.

But he has an Audi on the drive (£4K a year on tick), goes abroad on holiday twice a year (£3K a year), wears designer clothes, has sky tv in his room, and goes out with his mates twice a week.

And he's pretty average for the financial expectations of someone of his age.

Don't know many OAPs that have all of the above.

"

True. But the rich is a minority. I know an OAP with an Audi, three houses in two countries. A pension and it's all paid off.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *andS66Couple
over a year ago

Derby


"It's funny really, isn't it? The younger generation can't afford to buy a house - my son, for example, can't afford to buy a house.

But he has an Audi on the drive (£4K a year on tick), goes abroad on holiday twice a year (£3K a year), wears designer clothes, has sky tv in his room, and goes out with his mates twice a week.

And he's pretty average for the financial expectations of someone of his age.

Don't know many OAPs that have all of the above.

True. But the rich is a minority. I know an OAP with an Audi, three houses in two countries. A pension and it's all paid off. "

My son's not rich by any stretch of the imagination.

And the pensioner you know probably worked all his life to get his Audi and his houses.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"It's funny really, isn't it? The younger generation can't afford to buy a house - my son, for example, can't afford to buy a house.

But he has an Audi on the drive (£4K a year on tick), goes abroad on holiday twice a year (£3K a year), wears designer clothes, has sky tv in his room, and goes out with his mates twice a week.

And he's pretty average for the financial expectations of someone of his age.

Don't know many OAPs that have all of the above.

True. But the rich is a minority. I know an OAP with an Audi, three houses in two countries. A pension and it's all paid off.

My son's not rich by any stretch of the imagination.

And the pensioner you know probably worked all his life to get his Audi and his houses."

Very true. He arrived as a refugee with one suitcase after spending 3 years in prison, tortured. He worked very hard. But I agree, the new generation, including myself, it's easier to get loans for materialistic stuff. Will we have the same thing as that OAP?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *asyuk OP   Man
over a year ago

West London

^^

All still not my proposition. It's not what they do or do not choose to spend there money on or what happened to create the disparity.

Those generating new wealth do not benefit to the same extent as those who are not. This has not happened before.

Those working now depend to a progressively greater extent on the wealth of their parents for their future financial security than their parents had to.

Is that OK?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"^^

All still not my proposition. It's not what they do or do not choose to spend there money on or what happened to create the disparity.

Those generating new wealth do not benefit to the same extent as those who are not. This has not happened before.

Those working now depend to a progressively greater extent on the wealth of their parents for their future financial security than their parents had to.

Is that OK?"

The clear path is to extend the wealth of their parents. There are ways not to do that but are harder to discover. Which means a minority succeed in the new generation.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

In my job I regularly see the finances of older adults. Remember, they generally don't have mortgages to pay and many also claim attendance allowance (to pay for additional costs arising from care needs) but here in Scotland due to free personal and nursing care that is banked as a extra income.

Anecdotally I know, but my in-laws, one of whom never worked and the other who stopped working age 41 accumulated over £50,000 savings from their joint benefits (claiming DLA and carer's allowance for each other). Which was happily shared amongst their children when they died. All state money.

The image of the pensioner in poverty is increasingly a myth but given oaps turn up at the ballot box nobody is prepared to cut their means tested benefits. Whilst this rankles, setting off generation against generation distracts us from the poor choices our government makes.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 
 

By *ax777Man
over a year ago

Not here


"I work for the Citizens Advice in Glasgow and many people my age are living and working with incomes before rent/ mortgage etc that is less than a single pensioners state pension nevermind a couple with works pension topping it up "

The minimum wage is currently £7.20 per hour, so for a 37.5 hour week that equates to just over £14K per annum. I believe the state pension is around £8K per annum, so where are all these people working?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
Post new Message to Thread
back to top