The UK Politics & Brexit Thread

[Darrell]

Sadiq Khan tries to reassure Londoners he WON'T toughen ULEZ


Sadiq Khan tries to reassure Londoners he WON'T toughen ULEZ

 

[st13phil]

Sadiq Khan tries to reassure Londoners he WON'T toughen ULEZ

But who will believe the serial liar?

 

[AMGeed]

Jeremy Hunt throwing out a carrot to pension age voters by putting the triple lock in the Tory manifesto.

Triple lock for pensions to be in Tory manifesto, Jeremy Hunt says

Chancellor Jeremy Hunt says he will pay for the "expensive" pledge through economic growth.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[davymead]

Jeremy Hunt throwing out a carrot to pension age voters by putting the triple lock in the Tory manifesto.

Triple lock for pensions to be in Tory manifesto, Jeremy Hunt says

Chancellor Jeremy Hunt says he will pay for the "expensive" pledge through economic growth.

www.bbc.co.uk

Dragging of course some 450,000 extra in to paying tax as he’s frozen personal tax allowances again.

 

[AMGeed]

Dragging of course some 450,000 extra in to paying tax as he’s frozen personal tax allowances.

Well someone has to pay for the triple lock.
May as well be the ones who are getting the benefit seems to be the Tory policy.
Unless there is a Labour magic money tree, increased taxation is paying for all the handouts.
Beats me why the oil companies aren't being hit seeing the profits they make.

 

[Dippo]

Beats me why the oil companies aren't being hit seeing the profits they make.

What is the windfall tax on oil and gas companies and how much do they pay?

The government has extended the windfall tax on oil and gas companies to March 2029.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[markjay]

What is the windfall tax on oil and gas companies and how much do they pay?

The government has extended the windfall tax on oil and gas companies to March 2029.

www.bbc.co.uk

I don't understand the concept in the first place..... why charge additional tax?

 

[JHS]

Dragging of course some 450,000 extra in to paying tax as he’s frozen personal tax allowances again.

I love the triple lock, and at some stage the personal allowance will be raised.
I now await the Labour position on this.If they have one that is.

 

[Harrythedog]

I love the triple lock, and at some stage the personal allowance will be raised.
I now await the Labour position on this.If they have one that is.

The triple lock is a lifetime to some but the level for pension credit needs to be raised. My late mother was £1 over the limit so wasn’t entitled to it. Two weeks pension money didn’t cover the monthly costs of council tax and energy. Fortunately she had a family who paid all her bills but there are thousands of people in the 75+ age range who aren’t as lucky. £202 a week isn’t enough money for a pensioner to live on

 

[markjay]

I love the triple lock, and at some stage the personal allowance will be raised.
I now await the Labour position on this.If they have one that is.

Startmer will probably just do his usual ad hominem and respond by 'criticising' Rishi for being rich and married to a wealthy heiress.

 

[st13phil]

The state pension in the UK is a ticking financial timebomb.

The key fact that many don't understand is that there's no "pot of savings" that people have contributed to during their working lives, just a moral commitment to pay them a pension when they retire because that's what they were promised as an inducement to work and pay their taxes. Instead, every pound paid out in state pensions today is a pound contributed to the state by taxation yesterday, meaning that those paying tax are funding those drawing the state pension in real time. And we all know that the number of people drawing the state pension is going up year by year and they are also drawing their pension for longer as advances in medical care keeps them alive, while the number of people of a working age paying taxes is diminishing. Not a recipe for future financial happiness.

 

[m80]

And we all know that the number of people drawing the state pension is going up year by year and they are also drawing their pension for longer as advances in medical care keeps them alive,

The increasing difficulty, for some, to attain medical care might reduce the longevity. Unless fortunate enough to have ability to pay private.

while the number of people of a working age paying taxes is diminishing. Not a recipe for future financial happiness.

Does this explain the true strategy to encourage immigration. Until the larger population is falling off the edges of liddle ole UK?
In truth it's not sustainable. But in practice it kicks that can, again.

 

[st13phil]

Does this explain the true strategy to encourage immigration.

Arguably, yes. Trouble is its basically a ponzi scheme.

 

[DrNick]

It will be solved (partially at least) by the move to Personal Pension Plans. As more people actually start to pay into pensions (which ARE actually a pot of ringfenced money - in principle anyway) there will be more scope for financial shenanigans on the state pension as it moves to be a benefit rather than a right. I hear we are already discussing the idea of means testing it. As previously pointed out, if thresholds aren't moved, future pension rises will be taxed soon as a matter of course anyway.
Life expectancy is also falling according to a report published today.
Triple lock isn't a problem any more as inflation is under control and with a bit of spin the other parts of the triple lack can me made to be low as well for the next few years.

This is the politicians view anyway! Kick the can down the road as it will sort itself out eventually.

So nothing to see here - move on!

 

[190]

You have to wonder if the latest pledge is simply a trap for Labour. The conservatives have made a wild promise knowing they will not have to fulfil it. An honest solution would have been to increase pensions by average earnings and spend the rest on increasing tax allowances.

As a pensioner I shouldn't complain but I have to recognise that the triple lock is not sustainable long term because it's grossly unaffordable and would eventually end up with the state pension being higher than average earnings.

From the Spectator:

The pension bill this tax year is £124.3 billion. Had pensions been increased by CPI it would be £114.3 billion and had it increased by average earnings it would be £114.5 billion. These are the figures for the basic state pension.....

The £10 billion a year cost of the triple lock is just the beginning though. It works like a ratchet. Under its terms, the state pension can never go down, and nor can it ever under-perform average earnings – although it can outperform them, as it has done in nine of the past 12 years. Eventually, if the triple lock is allowed to continue, we would reach a stage where pensioners received more income than the average working person. Already by 2050, according to the IFS, state pensions could be costing up to an extra of £45 billion a year in today’s money – a figure which takes into account the growing number of pensioners as well as the triple lock.

 

[st13phil]

It will be solved (partially at least) by the move to Personal Pension Plans.

Agreed.

The issue is that that it requires a change in mindset of those working that it will be their own responsibility to fund their retirement rather than being reliant upon the state, which is the precise opposite of the culture that's fostered by the current working age benefits regime that encourages those disposed to do so to shirk their responsibility to provide for themselves on the basis that the state will pick up the tab. It also takes many years for such a change to work it's way through, and we're still far from reaching the end point.

There are other problems too, such as it effectively transferring all risk to the individual for what is probably the most difficult financial question to answer: how long will I live and how much do I need to support me 20, 30 or 40 years into the future. In the days of larger private sector employers, DB pension schemes assumed those risks on an insurance basis by spreading it across a large number of people, but those schemes are pretty much non-existent now. The public sector still enjoys those risk-free pensions they have always enjoyed though and with an ever increasing proportion of the country's economy being the public sector, my view is that it's high time to address that liability too.

I do think that there needs to be some serious conversation about how to address all this resulting in some firm decisions, but because it involves uncomfortable choices and the outcome of any decisions made now will be felt only long after the politicians making them have moved on, the can gets kicked down the road.

 

[st13phil]

As a pensioner I shouldn't complain but I have to recognise that the triple lock is not sustainable long term because it's grossly unaffordable and would eventually end up with the state pension being higher than average earnings.

The triple lock came about when inflation (and wage growth) were low, a large proportion of retirees had never made their own pension provision and the state pension was widely accepted as insufficient to live on. We are now in the situation where inflation (and wage growth) have been relatively high, many retirees have made their own pension provision (those who worked in the public sector are particularly fortunate in that respect) and the state pension is still widely accepted as insufficient to live on if that is the pensioner's only source of income.

My gut feel is that the state pension will become a means-tested benefit, but that needs to be set out in a future road-map that gives individuals the time to make their own financial arrangements, so that they don't suddenly find themselves in a financial hole. It's worth remembering that only the most wealthy wouldn't have taken the value of a future state pension into account when they were planning how much they needed to build up in their own personal pension, so to take it away when there is no time to adjust pension savings plans would be perverse.

 

[m80]

When young the priority of creating a pension pot is low compared to feeding kids, buying a larger property, sprucing it up, then having the car and holiday that everyone else seems to have (even if on't telly).
So as I / we / them approach 50+ there is realisation that a comfortable retirement is less likely as it 'aint that far away.

Then to change that mindset the pensions available need to look attractive, cos as I see it the growth performance is often dire, and so is the potential return on an annuity. Followed by the question I asked about 30 years ago, "what happens to that 1/2 million you say I need when I snuff it?"

I viewed a property portfolio to be my pension. The many recent changes mean it is near useless.
So we sell our 4 bed cave and trade down to a lesser cave. That's a strategy I believe many have planned for.
And we got a big dog to help with the heating in winter.

 

[Benzowner]

Just to put this into perspective, current minimum living wage in the Uk is £429 per week and current minimum wage is £391 per week current pension is £203 Increase the living wage by 5% would mean the pensions would need to rise by just under 11% to maintain the differential. This is the big problem with percentage increases, the lower paid get worse and worse off over time and then need big increases to catch up.

I am sure things will improve over time as the "private" pensions kick in and there is less and less reliance on state pension.

 

[st13phil]

When young the priority of creating a pension pot is low compared to feeding kids, buying a larger property, sprucing it up, then having the car and holiday that everyone else seems to have (even if on't telly).

In fairness, there has been an effort to address this with auto-enrolment, so as to make it "difficult" for employees to not contribute to a pension fund.

Then to change that mindset the pensions available need to look attractive, cos as I see it the growth performance is often dire, and so is the potential return on an annuity. Followed by the question I asked about 30 years ago, "what happens to that 1/2 million you say I need when I snuff it?"

This is exactly what I mean about transferring the entire financial risk to the individual. Much better to spread the risk across many for the benefit of the whole group.