Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Can we just put this in context. Truss wanted to reenergise the economy and wanted to lessen the tax demand on the economy. Her ideas were right, the execution was appalling.
I'm sure her intentions were altruistic; I can't for one second imagine she intended to crash the country off the side of Beachy Head.
But all the experts told her that her ideas were foolish. But Liz knew better; the experts were, after all, the "woke blob". So she listened to the fruitloops at Tufton Street, borrowed money to fund tax cuts for the rich, and then blamed everyone else when the markets comprehensively demonstrated that her ideas were imbecilic.
But sure, it was all the Bank of England's fault. And the Treasury's fault. And the OBR's fault. I'm reminded of nothing more than that meme with Principal Skinner in The Simpsons:
Ah, the old "money is being siphoned off to Africa and Asia" argument, as if the biggest problem with the finances of Western countries is that their money is being diverted to the second and third world, while the rich executives and institutional shareholders that really play the biggest part in siphoning off cash from the general public get off scot free. Such memes are only of utility to the rich and powerful, as they will benefit from the public's anger being diverted elsewhere.
Anti-foreign-aid arguments are in the same kind of category of anti-immigration arguments or, indeed, anti-unemployed or anti-minority arguments. Stir up public anger towards the relatively weak to direct it away from the strong.
Much of foreign aid is actually £x million worth of services/goods from the donor country - such as University places, products from factories, projects and consultants etc etc, which benefit the employment prospects (and salaries) of residents of the donor countries, as much if not more than the aid recipient countries. Little foreign aid is in the form of cash with no strings attached nowadays!
There is a big gap between rich and poor countries, and as we are seeing, if we don't help the poor countries get on their economic feet (giving them the means, and buying their products) then their residents will want to move to the rich countries to better their economic prospects.
How does the state subsidise an early retirement? There’s no state pension until the age of eligibility.
If you get a private pension before you get a state pension, it’s fully taxable above the personal allowance so you become a nett contributor to the state in retirement, not ‘subsidised’.
Once someone gets their state pension, that too is fully taxable. Anyone with a private pension approaching £50k will be paying more in tax than they receive in state pension, so still a nett contributor.
Oh - And for many who had ‘contracted out’ pensions in the past, they take a smaller state pension and their private pension tops it up.
I suppose through the eyes of some people I could be viewed as one of those wealthy pensioners that are being discussed in this thread and various other threads in the past. I am from the Baby Boomer generation, I live on my own in a 3 bedroomed house with a garden in a desirable village location, I have savings, I own a car, and I retired early at the age of 58.
There seems to be some people who feel that I should move out of my house into a one bedroomed flat in an urban location where I would be close to shops, could use public transport, and a car would no longer be essential.
I appreciate that I was fortunate in being able inherit my parents house and that was a major factor in me being able to retire early. However, I am far from being a millionaire pensioner! Being outside of London and the SE, even allowing for the good village location, the value of my house is not even approaching anything like half a million. I’m in the comfortable position that I am in because I worked hard all of my life and saved as much as I could for my retirement. Working as a primary school teacher, who remained in the classroom without taking on management responsibilities, I was never in a very highly paid job.
I suppose many people of my age are from a generation where we didn’t have the pressures to keep up with trends like people perhaps do these days. I didn’t have to have the most up to date phone on an expensive contract. I have never seen it important to spend huge amounts each month on the top subscription tv entertainment packages with sports and movies. I have always worn good clothes but didn’t spend a fortune on designer labels. I never went to the pub every night, ate out in expensive restaurants several times a week, smoked, gambled or gone on regular luxurious expensive holidays. I have not always wanted to keep up with the latest technology and gadgets. I have always had a comfortable home but have never been too proud to accept secondhand furniture from my relatives. All this makes me sound to have been a mean miserable old git, but I’ve had a very happy life so far, and have never gone without anything that I really wanted or needed including usually having a nice car and travelling widely within the UK.
Having worked hard and saved all of my life I am now quite comfortably well off in my retirement and enjoying spending my savings. I am able to live off my Teachers Pension, State Pension and my savings and I am not having to claim any benefits like many people do. Only a few months ago I paid out nearly £2,000 for dental treatment because I have not been able to access a NHS dentist since before Covid. I do not feel at all guilty about being relatively wealthy as a pensioner as I feel that I have worked hard for it and prepared for it. Better that than not having worked, squandered all my money and now having to rely on benefits.
But if you find you can no longer afford to heat your three-bedroomed house, I do think that you should realise that asset rather than expect more handouts from the government.
I don't have an issue at all with wealthy pensioners- they've earned it, fair play to them. My issue is with wealthy pensioners who then start moaning about how hard done to they are when, in reality, they have it pretty cushy. It sounds like you worked hard for what you have and you appreciate that you have a decent standard of living.
I'm not sure that's true, I don't think younger people today are any different to people of earlier generations. The yuppies who were so fashion conscious and flinging their bling in their early 20s in the 1980s are now pretty much at retirement age. Before them you had the teddy boys, the mods, the rockers, take your pick.
But if you find you can no longer afford to heat your three-bedroomed house, I do think that you should realise that asset rather than expect more handouts from the government.
I don't have an issue at all with wealthy pensioners- they've earned it, fair play to them. My issue is with wealthy pensioners who then start moaning about how hard done to they are when, in reality, they have it pretty cushy. It sounds like you worked hard for what you have and you appreciate that you have a decent standard of living.
I'm not sure that's true, I don't think younger people today are any different to people of earlier generations. The yuppies who were so fashion conscious and flinging their bling in their early 20s in the 1980s are now pretty much at retirement age. Before them you had the teddy boys, the mods, the rockers, take your pick.
Yes, I’m a relatively wealthy pensioner, I retired at 56 and am now 63, but two things - firstly I put money aside when I was younger instead of spending it and secondly I went through tough times when other generations seemed better off than mine.
So, yes, I’m not moaning, I made plans and many of them came to fruition. The exact same principle applies to everyone else, although if course not everyone is lucky enough to have money to put aside I know.
Younger people today seem to have some things better and some things worse than I did. I didn’t pay much for my education yet I lived in accommodation that would be condemned today. I’m neither complaining nor thinking that I was exceptionally favoured. We all make the best we can out of our circumstances.
But if you find you can no longer afford to heat your three-bedroomed house, I do think that you should realise that asset rather than expect more handouts from the government.
This is a massive problem in much of Europe, not just the UK. A friend owns a large inner-city flat in Poland, and her next door neighbour is massively in debt to the housing cooperative for heating bills. At the last count, she owed the best part of 20,000GBP, because she simply can't afford to heat a very large pre-war flat in a tenement. The housing cooperative now has a charge against her property, and rather than accepting that it's perhaps time to downsize, the neighbour is telling anyone that will listen that she's being cheated.
I have school friend
Like me she is now 76/77
After a few office jobs in an advertising agency, she set up her own agency. She made a fortune.
She decided to retire at age 50 to go and live in France, which was then very fashionable.
Many baby boomers wanted to retire at 50 but she is the only one l know who has achieved it.
Guess what has happened?
Inflation has happened.
She never considered that all her capital would one day be gone.
She never thought that things would rise in price by as much as they have. France was not the answer to a happy retirement on a shedload of cash, because the shed is now empty
Some things are predictable. But many things are not. Harold Macmillan put his downfall to "events". There is a view that inflation is simply theft caused by banks. l see logic in that argument
That's one of the key differences between (most) public sector / para public sector workplace pensions (including many in the rail industry, I believe) and nearly all private sector ones. Public sector pension are hedged against inflation AND longevity.
In the private sector you CAN buy an inflation-proof life annuity and will be protected against both. But the exchange rate is NASTY. To get a flat pension of c. £2k per month at age 65, you need a pot of c. £350k. To add inflation indexation you need over £500k. And that's with no spouse's pension. A £half million pot sounds a lot but it's not really that much unless you plan to die early
And so most people keep their money invested and "draw down" balancing a need for low risk investments against inflation protection and worrying about what happens if they live until they are 100 years old....
I think this is baseless. It's not true that anyone can be assured of a bright future just because they work hard. That sort of argument, I thought, had been disproved 40 or more years ago. Plenty of hard-working people were thrown on the scrapheap during Thatcher's time, and again during the Cameron and Osborne years.
Not baseless. Nothing in life is assured or guaranteed. Things happen. Savings are lost through inflation. As you point out, jobs can be lost, but alternatives can be found too. Just because you are/were hard working doesn't mean these things won't happen to you, but you pick yourself up and move on. Plenty of people in the same generation that are pensioners now are not enjoying an extravagant lifestyle; sometimes because of bad decisions they made earlier in life, and sometimes by things happening completely out of their control. But if you are hard working and take the right decisions you are more likely to have a wealthy retirement than those who haven't.
I don't have an issue at all with wealthy pensioners- they've earned it, fair play to them. My issue is with wealthy pensioners who then start moaning about how hard done to they are when, in reality, they have it pretty cushy. It sounds like you worked hard for what you have and you appreciate that you have a decent standard of living.
I have an issue with those pensioners who are wealthy and start moaning about how hard done to they are. I also realise that a lot of pensioners are not wealthy.
But if you find you can no longer afford to heat your three-bedroomed house, I do think that you should realise that asset rather than expect more handouts from the government.
I can't imagine wanting to retire at 50, unless you are a sports person or the like. Whatever your pension is, the money would surely run out at some point (as you say).
I can't imagine wanting to retire at 50, unless you are a sports person or the like. Whatever your pension is, the money would surely run out at some point (as you say).
Also the psychological concept is a little uncomfortable - the notion of retiring is (to me) associated with later life and 50 isn't particularly late in life these days, being about midway between 18 and average life expectancy.
You may not, but
Years ago the government of the day, for some bizarre and unfathomable reason, announced that any member of a private pension plan could take benefits from their 50th birthdays. They reduced the age at which people could access pension money from 60 to 50 overnight.
So without much thought, that is what some people did, and very soon inflation hit their pension pots. You must realise the world 40+ years ago was a very different place.
I think this is baseless. It's not true that anyone can be assured of a bright future just because they work hard. That sort of argument, I thought, had been disproved 40 or more years ago. Plenty of hard-working people were thrown on the scrapheap during Thatcher's time, and again during the Cameron and Osborne years.
Probably true under any government, no guarantees. Blair's government let Rover go to the wall, what replaced all of those jobs in Longbridge?
You can argue it was poor management, which it was, but they could have stepped in and helped sort it.
There has been a rather long series of questionable hiring decisions, going all the way back to giving Sue Grey a job - which was a pointless risk to take given her employment history.
There is something of a power vacuum it has to be said.
I don't have the same beef with Starmer that many others have: the only one of the "usual suspects*" I have a real problem with is the decision to cut winter fuel payments which was a bit silly - I think the farmer and WASPI things are over-inflated non-problems, only apply to narrow sections of the population, and have been vastly over-inflated by Labour's enemies. As for the reaction to the riots in the summer, well Starmer proved himself to be strong there, I don't know why people aren't giving him more credit for that in robustly dealing with those far-right thugs.
But the opposition is scarcely strong: Kemi Badenoch who seems to be implying that you're a wimp if you take a lunch break and is seen by many as an unhinged fringe figure with some distinctly unmodern attitudes.
Hard to predict what might happen in the next election. I guess both Labour and the Tories still have the chance to revise their leadership. The Tories, in government, after all did so not once but twice in the last goverment, and perhaps if Sunak hadn't chosen to go all anti-woke and appoint the likes of Braverman and Anderson, he might have had a chance this year, I guess.
(*There are other things I disagree with the government about, such as the decision to raise the bus fare cap and student tuition fees, to name two).
There has been a rather long series of questionable hiring decisions, going all the way back to giving Sue Grey a job - which was a pointless risk to take given her employment history.
Yeah, both main parties seem to make the most bizarre decisions. But then the talent pool is pretty shallow compared to the Thatcher/Major/Blair era. In my job, I’ve met Ian Lang (Trade under Thatcher) and Rachel Reeves and it’s not a remotely fair comparison…..
I don't have the same beef with Starmer that many others have: the only one of the "usual suspects*" I have a real problem with is the decision to cut winter fuel payments which was a bit silly - I think the farmer and WASPI things are over-inflated non-problems, only apply to narrow sections of the population, and have been vastly over-inflated by Labour's enemies.
Well I think the winter fuel payment thing was a pointless fight to pick - especially given that the triple lock will consume all of the savings in relatively short order.
If you are going to pick a fight with pensioners (and I think someone has to), you should just go for something that might actually achieve something in the long run.
As for the reaction to the riots in the summer, well Starmer proved himself to be strong there, I don't know why people aren't giving him more credit for that in robustly dealing with those far-right thugs.
I think any credit for the riot response was rather undermined by him attempting to use the original knife attack for a photo opportunity. I dont think his showing up at the site with the press really played well with the public at large.
Hard to predict what might happen in the next election. I guess both Labour and the Tories still have the chance to revise their leadership. The Tories, in government, after all did so not once but twice in the last goverment, and perhaps if Sunak hadn't chosen to go all anti-woke, he might have had a chance this year, I guess.
I think the Conservatives are a non-entity moving forwards, the real question is how fast their vote collapses into Reform - especially in the areas where Reform finished second in the recent election.
Meanwhile, the growing schism in the Labour party is gnawing away at what were traditionally safe inner-city seats.
THe greens and the Corbyn grouping are not going to go away - especially as the mess in the middle east is likely to continue for years to come. Once political awakenings happen they don't tend to undo themselves after all.
Having voted Labour at the 2024 election I admit to being far from impressed with the government thus far and I think that unless they get their act together they can say goodbye to a good proportion of the pensioner and farming vote at the next election.
My local MP is the Chief Secretary to the Treasury who was returned with, IIRC, an increased majority. I am not a pensioner but I don't think he will survive the next election.
It is perhaps worth recalling that the next election is unlikely to be much before May 2029 which is still four and half years away. I ain't exactly happy with how things have gone so far but that is still a long old way away.
It is perhaps worth recalling that the next election is unlikely to be much before May 2029 which is still four and half years away. I ain't exactly happy with how things have gone so far but that is still a long old way away.
Excluding times when the fixed term parliament act dictated the date of the next election, it is incredibly rare for a party that waits five years to be reelected.
2015 is more or less the only example.
I think May 2028 is far more likely than anything else. Unless ofcourse Starmer's position is utterly hopeless by then and he clings on for another year in the hope of a miracle.
The real question is what happens to Labour's coalition with its haemmorhage of support and whether the vestigial conservative voter base defects to Reform.
Excluding times when the fixed term parliament act dictated the date of the next election, it is incredibly rare for a party that waits five years to be reelected.
2015 is more or less the only example.
I think May 2028 is far more likely than anything else. Unless ofcourse Starmer's position is utterly hopeless by then and he clings on for another year in the hope of a miracle.
The real question is what happens to Labour's coalition with its haemmorhage of support and whether the vestigial conservative voter base defects to Reform.
It also depends on how well organised the opposition was. If an election was called today, I suspect it would be a three-way hung parliament, unless Reform and the Tories struck a very quick deal.
I think two factors may determine the date of the next election. The fact that Labour have so many backbenchers will lead to some disquiet at some stage - Starmer can't give them all a job to bind them to collective responsibility. Already some are voicing their disapproval of the WASPI issue.
Secondly, if the economy tanks, (and the latest economic forecasts do not make good reading), then the money markets may force Starmer out.
I'm no fan of Starmer, but I think we should at least allow the current government the chance to bed-in; it hasn't even been five months since Labour was elected. We had three Tory Prime Ministers in a much shorter period of time...
Having voted Labour at the 2024 election I admit to being far from impressed with the government thus far and I think that unless they get their act together they can say goodbye to a good proportion of the pensioner and farming vote at the next election.
Cynically though, is the farming vote important to them? Rural areas tend to be either Conservative or Lib Dem. Labour is basically the party of the cities, the large towns and the suburbs.
My local MP is the Chief Secretary to the Treasury who was returned with, IIRC, an increased majority. I am not a pensioner but I don't think he will survive the next election.
Had to look him up and what seat he's MP for. Looks like it's an area I would class as socially liberal. Who do you think would take over?
The Tories: they have held the seat in the past but that was in the Cameron era. Boris failed to charm the seat sufficiently in 2019. I don't think the strident approach of Badenoch would play well in that kind of seat. Possible they could get the seat if they drop the anti-woke, anti-immigration and anti-Europe line, I guess.
The Lib Dems? Possible as there are a good number of Lib Dem seats not too far away. The Greens?
Given this seat survived a Boris takeover it strikes me as the sort of seat which would hold on to Labour next time.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
I think May 2028 is far more likely than anything else. Unless ofcourse Starmer's position is utterly hopeless by then and he clings on for another year in the hope of a miracle.
The real question is what happens to Labour's coalition with its haemmorhage of support and whether the vestigial conservative voter base defects to Reform.
Are Reform not too extreme to appeal to more than about 25% of the population though?
In the event of a Tory collapse could you see Farage getting in as PM? Personally I couldn't because I think he is too extreme to win the number of seats needed for a majority. And a large percentage of the population would be terrified of the prospect (personally, I think we could see an end to full democracy if Farage got in), so we might get the unthinkable happening and dyed-in-the-wool liberal remainers voting Conservative to keep them out in seats which are likely to be a Tory/Reform tossup.
Badenoch I think is too clueless and too strident to win an election, and has outdated attitudes which will turn off most people of working age in 2028/29, certainly.
I can honestly see the likely result of the next election as being one where all parties are far short of a majority and the next government is almost certain to be a coalition, unless Labour or the Tories can improve their standing dramatically.
One interesting question will be the timing of the next election with respect to Trump. It's almost certain to be either in Trump's last days, with the campaign for his replacement well under way, or post-Trump. Presumably by then, Trump will have made an absolute b***s-up of running the USA and I can see us not wanting to install some form of Trumpist government circa 2028 or 2029. That would presumably discourage people from voting Reform, certainly, or even a Badenoch-style Tory Party.
As I said the Tories would do really well to reset themselves to a party in the Major or Cameron mould. Centre-right, pro-big-business but not reactionary and dropping all the anti-woke, anti-Europe stuff. They would not get my vote (unless tactically to keep Reform out!) but at least it would make a Tory win next time a lot more palatable.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Yeah, both main parties seem to make the most bizarre decisions. But then the talent pool is pretty shallow compared to the Thatcher/Major/Blair era. In my job, I’ve met Ian Lang (Trade under Thatcher) and Rachel Reeves and it’s not a remotely fair comparison…..
I do wonder why this is. Many - not all - of the politicians of the Thatcher-Major-Blair era all seemed (IMO) to have a certain "professionalism" and "wiseness" (irrespective of party, I could list a mix of Labour and Tories here). It seems to have been from approximately Cameron and more particularly since Johnson that politicians have come over more amateurish, with some exceptions (Theresa May actually wasn't really that bad, but was hounded out by her own party for not being fundamentalist-Brexiter enough).
Actually, that happened a long time ago as a succession of leaders trooped off to Davos to get their marching orders [Starmer admittedly prefers the snowy Swiss slopes to Westminster's damp paths in January] and some of the world's most famous billionaires made their way to the open door of 10 Downing Street with their wish lists.
Actually, that happened a long time ago as a succession of leaders trooped off to Davos to get their marching orders [Starmer admittedly prefers the snowy Swiss slopes to Westminster's damp paths in January] and some of the world's most famous billionaires made their way to the open door of 10 Downing Street with their wish lists.
What I meant was, free and fair elections. Personally, and this is just my own opinion and speculation, I could see us possibly moving to an Orban-type model, for example.
However less-than-ideal the likes of Cameron, Johnson, Sunak and others have been, I don't think it's a good idea to underestimate the serious threats that could arise if Reform got in. Reform would make the likes of Boris a walk in the park. Same with all those other far-right parties throughout Europe: RN, AfD, etc.
What I meant was, free and fair elections. Personally, and this is just my own opinion and speculation, I could see us possibly moving to an Orban-type model, for example.
However less-than-ideal the likes of Cameron, Johnson, Sunak and others have been, I don't think it's a good idea to underestimate the serious threats that could arise if Reform got in. Same with all those other far-right parties throughout Europe: RN, AfD, etc.
An assault on true democracy with the same kind of goings-on that take place in, for example, contemporary Hungary.
Minorities being further marginalised, for example ethnic minorities or LGBTQ+ individuals, to name but two.
Mistreatment of immigrants and perhaps certain classes of immigrant (those without citizenship) losing the right to stay here.
Institutionalised vilification of the "intellectual liberal elite".
Perhaps increased internet surveillance so we'd all have to be extremely careful what we said about the Government online, especially with AI evolving to make it perhaps harder to remain anonymous.
All my own personal opinion and speculation.
As I said, I can see, in my opinion, them possibly resembling Fidesz or AfD or parties of that ilk.
It is perhaps worth recalling that the next election is unlikely to be much before May 2029 which is still four and half years away. I ain't exactly happy with how things have gone so far but that is still a long old way away.
Indeed, and I'd rather the government "did an Attlee" and planned for five years rather than headlines. Selfishly, I don't care how bad things are in the short-term as long as there are real improvements in the long-term - and that's how I'm going to judge this government, so I'd rather not count my chickens yet. I want some peace and some stability after the last five years, and if I could, I'd hibernate until next summer! I'm neither impressed nor unimpressed at the government so far - they seem to have alright ideas but need an Alastair Campbell - but they're not turning me into any less of a prematurely grumpy young man, put it that way.
The influence of George Soros over political debates and events in Britain is well documented - perhaps half a million of anti-Brexit propaganda, funding of events which favour splitting Scotland from the rest of the UK... Yes, I'm very fearful.
We are aware of an issue with emails from the Forum to Microsoft-based email accounts (hotmail/outlook/live.com email addresses). This is being looked into currently, thanks for your patience meanwhile.
