SWWood- Location: Dover
- Registered: 30 May 2012
- Posts: 261
#1
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#2
i would think there will be many strong views either way on this.
Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#3
oh dear
lets sort out those able to afford the hits first
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#4
i think that's what the article is saying keith, the aim seems to be that some pensioners are better off than many middle income people working.
Guest 756- Registered: 6 Jun 2012
- Posts: 727
#5
So, we encourage people to take out private pensions, to save for their old age, pay tax all their working life just so we can take more off them when they retire?
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#6
well said lesley
doesnt encourage you to save
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
#7
unless you can exploit a tax loop hole and shove it in a tax haven.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#8
oh no dont get me going brian
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Jan Higgins
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,931
#9
Lesley can not agree more but you left off the fact that we still pay tax on those private pensions when we eventually get them.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#10
we agree jan!!!!!!
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 756- Registered: 6 Jun 2012
- Posts: 727
#11
And savings too Jan. Makes you think of "double jeopardy" laws!
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
#12
They must think we are short-sighted.
If pensions are targeted and people drawing a pension are made to go into poverty, those currently not drawing a pension will be on the list when they do so further down the line.
We'd all know that once we go into pension, we've had it.
Trouble is, we've had it anyway, long before the time comes round to retire..
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#13
Daft over the top comment there Alexander. No-one wants to 'target' pensioners and drive them into poverty....
What people here are not addressing is a much more important problem.
Many people are going to end up very poorly off in retirement because they are simply not making enough provision for it. Most of us who retire after 2016 will get, in today's money £144 per week state pension with no means testing. That is £7,488 per annum and the nil rate tax band is £10,500 over age 65 and that is £3,000 above the state pension.
This is not enough for a decent lifestyle in retirement for anyone.
Everyone can save sufficient in a pension to top their income up by £3,000, or 40%, with no income tax to pay. Just to get to that level roughly speaking means saving a pension fund of £70,000 25% of which can be taken as a tax free lump sum, get invested into a Stocks and Shares ISA (over 2 tax years) and get an estimated £800 extra tax free per annum from it. If in your working life you save additional money into the Stocks and Shares ISA that too can give you more tax free income.
Al is takes is a bit of sensible planning and any pensioner can get a decent net of tax income and tax relief along the way with it. Just what I said above would be the equivilent of someone in work under 65 earning over £15,000 gross salary per annum.
I have to add - none of this represents advice to invest. It is vital that people get advice and plan properly for their future while understanding the risks of any investment they make.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#14
It's ruthless and just will make people not save or have private pensions etc#goes against other policies of this cobbled together lot
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#15
Errrrm Keith. No government has disincentised savings more than your lot. If you want chapter and verse of their measures that damaged savings then I can provide them.
What will help encourage more savings is the end to means testing pensions and the introduction of the new flat rate pension. More needs to be done and I am not sure that the current 'auto-enrollment' policy is the right one but one thing is for sure policies of the present government will not damage private savings in the way you suggest.
Guest 714- Registered: 14 Apr 2011
- Posts: 2,594
#16
The Fabian Society is Britain's oldest political think tank. Founded in 1884, the Society is at the forefront of developing political ideas and public policy on the left.
Thats taken from their website.
Its all starting to unravel now, the usual fools read the headline and assume the Daily Mail are advocating slaughtering poor people at the age of 65.
I've been telling you lot for ages, the party is over, you ain't seen mothing yet
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#17
your right david
reg has been warning the same
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#18
What exactly? where?
Guest 714- Registered: 14 Apr 2011
- Posts: 2,594
#19
Keith, where has Reg been warning that?
Are you now saying Keith that the Fabian Society, arguably labour's most influential group, are right or wrong?
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#20
I'm willing to take advice, was just replying to your post David where you say the party is over, although coming from a lefty angle Reg has been warning just the same
your saying it has to happen and the sooner the better
reg is saying it should happen slower
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS