UK Government theft.

There Is a real problem for those people who have swallowed the hook, the line and the sinker of the Thatcherist doctrine. It was purpose designed as an appeal to those who’d suffered under the excesses of the trade unions which had been corrupted by the likes of Scargill and Roberts. If you worked in one of the industries where only a left handed cogwheel fitter could install a left handed cogwheel you were easy meat for the (later proven empty) promises of Thatcherism.

As we can see not everyone has realised just how unpleasant these doctrines are nor exactly how they relate to the broken promises of the social contract. What frightens me is that I remember when there was a genuine spirit of cooperation between the political parties and a desire to do the best for us all. Now all I see is spitefullness and bile. The pension changes are just one example of that.
 
DK602 said:
to pay the people who are the biggest drain on the Country.
Click to expand...
By that I guess you mean current OAP's, a good percentage of whom will have fought in WW2, I am sure they would be very happy to be called a drain. Or perhaps they worked in the public sector, teachers, fireman, nurses, same comment - terrible undeserving drain. Or those that are soon to retire, the ones accused of having it easy, earning a fortune and having cheap hoses to buy, so they will have paid a considerable amount during their working lives in tax, ni, etc - more of a drain on society.
I feel very sorry for you, such a miopic vision of the previous generations of workers. Unless of coure you mean the current work shy generation, odd that as we have record numbers of people in employment, somehow that doesnt add up to your view of the Country.
There are some that are work shy and they will get the minimum State Pension, although more likely with their current lifestyle they wont get any pension. Remember less than 10 yrs contributions and you get nothing or of course they wont reach retirement age, problem solved.
 
We must not lose sight that people receiving state benefits & the state pension generally spend the money they receive; people on limited means generally don't save much, they pay VAT on goods they purchase, fuel duty etc; they pay for services & the service deliverers in turn pay their own taxes & NI.
 
sirch said:
That is just income tax. There is value added tax, council tax, fuel duty, road tax and whole host of other taxes which apply at the same rate to everyone and cannot be avoided however little you earn.
Click to expand...
True but those earning more are likely to be spending more and as a result paying more tax in each of those cases.
 
DK602 said:
I should have explained better - no money from the state should be given to the unemployed or poor.

If someone earns lots of money then they can spend/pass it on to who they like.

No one needs to starve - give them tokens to buy healthy food and not McDonalds etc.

State pension should be a thing of the past - this Country looks after the poor far to much!
Click to expand...

I see the forum has a new troll!
Former member, maybe?
 
nilagin said:
True but those earning more are likely to be spending more and as a result paying more tax in each of those cases.
Click to expand...
And those that earn more & can afford it employ accountants to avoid paying more tax. Especially true of small businesses & self employed.
 
DK602 said:
Sat in Costa - outside two unemployed drinking coffee an smoking. They are also talking about how much they spend in arcades trying to win an Xbox!
Click to expand...
And you know they're unemployed how?
Frankly if you posted that the Sun will definitely rise in the morning I'd check for myself - you appear to be as dishonest as you are ignorant.
 
It's a real shame the rich get the blame for the ills of the Country when they pay the most.
 
Phil V said:
And you know they're unemployed how?
Frankly if you posted that the Sun will definitely rise in the morning I'd check for myself - you appear to be as dishonest as you are ignorant.
Click to expand...

Fairly obvious - I can hear what they are saying!

How do you know I'm dishonest then?
 
nilagin said:
True but those earning more are likely to be spending more and as a result paying more tax in each of those cases.
Click to expand...
Not true at all.
There's a realistic limit to when people stop spending and start squirrelling.
If you earn 20,000 a year you're likely to spend it all. By the time it gets to £60,000, you're almost certainly saving a wedge - and by the time you're earning 6 figures if you're not investing heavily you'd be the exception rather than the rule.
 
DK602 said:
It's a real shame the rich get the blame for the ills of the Country when they pay the most.
Click to expand...
The rich have always exploited the poor. If they weren't happy with their lot they would go somewhere else...... Oh! Sorry they already have moved their money offshore :)
 
DK602 said:
It's a real shame the rich get the blame for the ills of the Country when they pay the most.
Click to expand...

Seeing as they are often most culpable seems fair enough to me

Those chaps in Costa may have just been the idle wealthy frittering away cash they earned from exploiting the poor
 
DK602 said:
It's a real shame the rich get the blame for the ills of the Country when they pay the most.
Click to expand...
Everyone else has already told you that's not true.
We can't change your belief system but we can point out consistently when you're factually incorrect.

The rich aren't being blamed for anything (the only 'blame' I'm reading here is from you)
 
I read this thread and nobody else has come up with a solution!

It was stated earlier that in the past the average male drew a state pension for 5-10yrs. It is clear that there are a lot more of us living for longer - is the answer really 'make the rich pay for it'?
 
Phil V said:
Everyone else has already told you that's not true.
We can't change your belief system but we can point out consistently when you're factually incorrect.

The rich aren't being blamed for anything (the only 'blame' I'm reading here is from you)
Click to expand...


tijuana taxi said:
Seeing as they are often most culpable seems fair enough to me

Those chaps in Costa may have just been the idle wealthy frittering away cash they earned from exploiting the poor
Click to expand...
 
DK602 said:
I read this thread and nobody else has come up with a solution!

It was stated earlier that in the past the average male drew a state pension for 5-10yrs. It is clear that there are a lot more of us living for longer - is the answer really 'make the rich pay for it'?
Click to expand...
I don't know what you're reading - from where I'm sat the consensus appears to be that a rise in pension age is inevitable as we're living longer.
 
Phil V said:
I don't know what you're reading - from where I'm sat the consensus appears to be that a rise in pension age is inevitable as we're living longer.
Click to expand...

Phil - that doesn't help the young unemployed though.

Would it not be better at some point just to get rid of the state pension - I understand there has to be a 'cut off point' for those already in work but would it not be sensible to say 'Those reaching employment age at 2025? will no longer be entitled to a state pension?
 
cross posted - too tricky a concept for you?
 
Phil V said:
cross posted - too tricky a concept for you?
Click to expand...

Probably - I went without luxuries as a young man and managed to retire at 35; some people want their cake and to eat it.
 
DK602 said:
Phil - that doesn't help the young unemployed though.

Would it not be better at some point just to get rid of the state pension - I understand there has to be a 'cut off point' for those already in work but would it not be sensible to say 'Those reaching employment age at 2025? will no longer be entitled to a state pension?
Click to expand...

The state pension system is working fine - it gets tweaked based on an ageing population and a government unwilling to subsidise it.

Why do you think such a radical change is required - other than the fact you personally don't like the idea that a single penny of your money goes to someone you feel is undeserving.
 
DK602 said:
Probably - I went without luxuries as a young man and managed to retire at 35; some people want their cake and to eat it.
Click to expand...
Many of us went without luxuries and still can't afford to retire.

It is absolute nonsense that you deserve all you have and that people with less deserve what they have, and people with more are more deserving than you. We don't live in a meritocracy. We all have different start points, different abilities and different opportunities.
 
Phil V said:
The state pension system is working fine - it gets tweaked based on an ageing population and a government unwilling to subsidise it.

Why do you think such a radical change is required - other than the fact you personally don't like the idea that a single penny of your money goes to someone you feel is undeserving.
Click to expand...

OK.
 
DK602 said:
Probably - I went without luxuries as a young man and managed to retire at 35; some people want their cake and to eat it.
Click to expand...
Bet people say look at that bloke, sits in coffee shops, doesn't go to work and wastes his time posting rubbish on message boards.
Lazy git, don't want my money supporting him especially in old age when he hasn't made enough contributions
 
tijuana taxi said:
Bet people say look at that bloke, sits in coffee shops, doesn't go to work and wastes his time posting rubbish on message boards.
Lazy git, don't want my money supporting him especially in old age when he hasn't made enough contributions
Click to expand...

Maybe?
 
broc said:
And those that earn more & can afford it employ accountants to avoid paying more tax. Especially true of small businesses & self employed.
Click to expand...
You can be poorly paid and self employed and still avoid paying more tax.
 
broc said:
Talking of taxes, what about the single disabled widow living in a 2 bedroom council house being charged 'bedroom' tax in an area where there are no single bed roomed properties available for her to move to?
Click to expand...

What about the couple or family living in a 1 bedroom flat that are unable to find a 2 bed flat
 
nilagin said:
You can be poorly paid and self employed and still avoid paying more tax.
Click to expand...
Very true. Tax avoidance is legal, evasion isn't.

I knew of a Quantity Surveyor (now dead, sadly) who 'employed' his wife as housekeeper, gave her a company car & company fuel card all of which were set against the business cost. His two children both had 'company' computers at home using a 'company' phone line to gain access to the Internet.
 
cambsno said:
What about the couple or family living in a 1 bedroom flat that are unable to find a 2 bed flat
Click to expand...
A not uncommon situation I imagine. There's not much profit for builders building small social housing units, they would rather build estates of closely packed detached houses for sale.
 
one thing I found out when researching my early retirement 5 years ago is you only 35 qualifying years to get a full state pension if you pay any more NI you don't get any more.
I qualify for my full state pension at 53 and will be retiring at 55 on my private pension, luck and good fortune and I will start collecting my bonus state pension at 67.
 
There's some pretty personal stuff being thrown about in here. Please remember that that's not acceptable.

@Phil V , @viv1969 , I'm speaking to you.
 
dod said:
There's some pretty personal stuff being thrown about in here. Please remember that that's not acceptable.

@Phil V , @viv1969 , I'm speaking to you.
Click to expand...
Yes ma'am...
just like to point out the familiarity in at least one of the responses - are we sure this is a 'new' member? ;)
 
DK602 said:
Probably - I went without luxuries as a young man and managed to retire at 35; some people want their cake and to eat it.
Click to expand...
thats an error on your retirement age surely, if it isn't then you managed to accumulate your pension to last the rest of your life in around 18-19 years :rolleyes: you must have been one of those rich folks I keep hearing about that pay too much tax :eek:
 
broc said:
I knew of a Quantity Surveyor (now dead, sadly) who 'employed' his wife as housekeeper, gave her a company car & company fuel card all of which were set against the business cost. His two children both had 'company' computers at home using a 'company' phone line to gain access to the Internet.
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure that would have gone down as evasion and attracted a stiff penalty.

People claim to do some outrageous things, especially with a couple of pints in them. The reality is often quite different when they're sober, especially if sat in front of an investigating officer. :sulk:
 
AndrewFlannigan said:
I'm pretty sure that would have gone down as evasion and attracted a stiff penalty.

People claim to do some outrageous things, especially with a couple of pints in them. The reality is often quite different when they're sober, especially if sat in front of an investigating officer. :sulk:
Click to expand...
Maybe he exaggerated ......... & it was a long time ago.
 
Last edited:
AndrewFlannigan said:
I'm pretty sure that would have gone down as evasion and attracted a stiff penalty.

People claim to do some outrageous things, especially with a couple of pints in them. The reality is often quite different when they're sober, especially if sat in front of an investigating officer. :sulk:
Click to expand...
Unless you're an MP
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top