Now is the very time we need strong unions and a socialist or at least socially responsible government to lead the country.

who was in charge for the last 13 years?

arguably strong unions and a socially irresponsible government intent on gerrymandering the country

……….hmmmmm, I'm paying for the unfunded public sector pensions >£4k p.a………….

This simply is not true as has been demonstrated many times. At the moment public sector pension contributions exceed payouts – ie the government is making money out of it and has done for decades. More is belong paid into funds than comes out of them – and this has been true for decades. What happens to the surplus – it is used to reduce tax bills.

If the better off can "evade" taxation why can't personnel of the lower order do the same?

No reason at all. Don't get too upset though when we hold people doing so with the same level of contempt the MPs got for claiming expenses "according to the rules".

I thought it said something else on the news, TJ?

demonstrated where?

LA pensions in England operate as separate funds and some are in good condition others less so. The big issue is the unfunded schemes

http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2010/jun/27/public-sector-pensions-real-cost

You have a misty eyed view on this your <10% contribution is not funding the mid twenties % cost of the NHS (and other) schemes

'Like an unstable Ponzi scheme, it will only work if tomorrow's generation of new members and taxpayers is able to stomach a higher cost to pay tomorrow for the unfunded promises being made today.'

Read more: http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/news/article.html?in_article_id=508144&in_page_id=2#ixzz0t03KxzA9

stumpyjon – Member

Now is the very time we need strong unions and a socialist or at least socially responsible government to lead the country.

"Would the last person to leave please turn the lights off"

Rupert Murdoch has taught you well stumpyjon.

18 years later ……. and you can still regurgitate, on demand, what you read in the Sun.

It is really quite staggering how so many docile individuals are fully prepared to trust in a multi-billionaire foreigner. Are these people really that incapable of thinking for themselves ?

Yup…….some people need to learn a bit about class politics and not put their faith in those with great power wealth and privilege. Then perhaps, they would realise the only concern and motivation these people have, is to defend and expand their great power wealth and privileges.

It really is amazing how so many people are genuinely prepared to believe and that a foreign newspaper proprietor, or, the great great great great great grandson of King William IV, can actually give a toss about their lives.

To presumably believe that a young David Cameron might have come home from Eton one day, and excitedly informed his father, "please darling papa, I've been talking to some of my friends at school today and I've decided that I wish to one day become Prime minister, so that I might help those millions of people less fortunate than us".

To which his father answered, "well my son, for generations our ancestors have only been concerned with power and wealth, but now I see that was all wrong, and a fairer Britain is what really matters".

FFS……….more like his father one day said to him "listen son, I sent you to Eton because in the great family tradition, you were born to lead. Get into politics and hopefully one day you will rule over the great unwashed".

And so it is, that we now have a situation where ex public school yobs and hooligans, drunk with power, are on the rampage. Destroying, vandalising, and trashing the British State – it's infrastructure and welfare provisions.

Cameron's father must be proud ………… although of course, it's the Sun "wot done it".

Indeed Ernie!

TJ, you're wrong on your pensions horse again.

At the moment public sector pension contributions exceed payouts – ie the government is making money out of it and has done for decades.

The difference between public sector pension contributions and payouts is called "net public service pensions".

It has invariably been in deficit.

It currently stands at £3.1bn deficit being funded by the tax payer for 2009-2010. It was £3.1bn last year too. It will be £4.0bn next year.

Also note that in this calculation, that receipts of £24.3bn this year INCLUDE employer contributions – i.e. Tax Payer's money allocated for public service and being used to make pension contributions on public sector workers' behalf.

So, not only does the tax payer subsidise the current public sector pension contributions shortfall, that shortfall to be subsidised would be higher still if the contributions paid in the name of the worker's employer, the taxpayer, were excluded.

See the OBR forecast http://budgetresponsibility.independent.gov.uk/d/obr_forecast_public_service_pensions.pdf

and even the TUC's own press briefing on pension statistics (p3, para3):
http://www.tuc.org.uk/extras/publicsectorpensions.pdf

You may now take this opportunity to admit to being wrong again.

Oh, and you forgot to mention how you got that 9 month paid leave in your public sector job on the other thread…

To be honest, I think Cameron THINKs he's helping the great unwashed. Whether his ideology can work or really is moral is another matter.

Ernie, you really are locked into your own little idealogical world aren't you. Yes that's where I got the quote from but I have never read the tabloids in my life, that quote has been picked up by many media outlets. The comment was a little tongue in cheek given the comment about needing strong unions etc. I really don't think we need a more extreme version of what we've had for the last few years.

Please stop assuming people who don't agree with you are to weak minded to have developed their views on their own from a wide range of sources.

This country really is in the sh*t if we start judging each other according to who our employer is. That's got nowt to do with the politicians either – only ourselves to blame for that one.
Chillout people and be glad we live in one of the richest countries in the world – we've got more than most you know!

Well good news I have a job still and the High street and Ulswater ride was superb
Thanks for support and well done stw no one told me to MTFU !

God given right enshrined in law surely. I do sometimes wonder if public sector employees T & Cs should be a lot closer to the statutory minimums.

Statutory minimum redundnancy for us more hols but linked to service. Oddly I wish everyone enjoyed more than the bare minimum the state has to put in place to stop employers from denying people simple things likes holidays, sick pay and decent working conditions. Should we not aspire to all be better rather be dragged down to the lowest? What next all of us on the minimum wage?

molgrips Cameron joined the tories under Thatcher and helped her government help the great unwashed via Black wednesday – may have the wrong economic catastrophe there but one of them. I doubt anyone could have joined that version of the Tory party with the goal of helping poor people- if they did you would really need to question their judgement and possibly sanity. Dave beleives ,at best ,in letting people help themselves [small state, encouraging enterprise or "wealth creation"] which is easy if you are the son of millionairres and educated at Eton. It is somewhat harder to help yourself if you are born in a sinkhole estate going to a pi55 poor local comp with gang problems and parents with no money.

Nice one Johnnie – good to hear. Things not looking great at all in the youth work sector generally I hear 🙁

But as you say 'we're all in this together'

Perhaps the current contrast has less to do with "idyllic" conditions in the public sector but rather the deteriorating working conditions in the private sector caused by a combination of incompetent management or simply naked profiteering, exploitation and lack of social responsibilty of companies who downsize, outsource, cut pension rates, casualise at the same time as making record profits.

Nail on head.

Dave beleives ,at best ,in letting people help themselves

Yes, and I think he really believes that'll work.

Kind of like my father in law. He thinks everyone has the chance to be rich and successful. I tried to point out that for there to be winners there also have to be losers; in other words that not everyone can be the CEO of a major company but many more people have to operate the machines and pack the products on minimum wage – but he didn't seem to understand what that meant.

Black wednesday – wasn't that the day in 1992 we were squeezed out of the European Monetary Union?

That was a _good_ thing.

The political classes woke up and realised the whole monetary union thing was mad, and we all got back to sensible interest rates and economic growth.

Yes that's where I got the quote from but I have never read the tabloids in my life

No of course you don't. But you still quote them anyway ……….. such is Murdoch's power.

And far from me being 'locked into my own little idealogical world' it's you who appears to be 'locked into an idealogical world' …………an idealogical world mapped out by a foreign newspaper owner.

I on the other hand, can see beyond the agenda set by billionaires. I am in fact free thinking.

And yes, I have always understood that the comment was "tongue in cheek" ……..the Sun wasn't actually serious when it said "will the last person to leave Britain please turn out the lighta". It was supposed to be a "joke" 🙄
The clue, if you needed one, was the picture of Kinnock in a light bulb.

.

Ratty – what's your point ? So Murdoch backed Blair in '97 …..and ?

Strangely enough I stopped supporting the Labour Party in '95. It took Murdoch a couple of years more than me to suss out Blair. But in the end we both turned out to be right.

I on the other hand, can see beyond the agenda set by billionaires. I am in fact free thinking.

Hahahahahahahaahahahahah, hahahah, hahaha, hahahahhahaha, oh, you really make me laugh…

Tell me, is it due to your free thinking ideology that not only have the people of the country failed to rally in your cause, but even the Labour party abandoned your principles, indeed the entire USSR abandoned your principles and politics, China's thrown them by the wayside, and realistically the only countries that continue to apply your brand of politics in any serious sense are mad dictatorial pariahs like Cuba and North Korea.

Your 'free' thinking comes straight from the pages of Socialist Worker, you're as independent of media bias as the average daily mail reader!

I don't think ernie's politics are hardline communism, as you seem to be suggesting. Or are you calling him a socialist? I can't quite be sure since you are raving.

Hahahahahahahaahahahahah, hahahah, hahaha, hahahahhahaha, oh, you really make me laugh…

You know ratty ……. it's those "special moments" when I realise that I have put a smile on someone's face and made them happy, that makes my day so complete for me.

I am in fact free thinking.

Does that mean you disagree with everybody else?

£100..
… for TJ's pension pot

Remember, pensions are deferred pay.

Never good news, having worked in Engineering for 10 years there have been redundancies every year which ever company I have been in. So the fact its happening to me or other people really doesnt register the 'call the ambulance' alarm any more.

Uptil now generally it has opened up better jobs for most people other than the ones that have been sat around over-paid in cushy jobs waiting for their pension or large payout.

I have a feeling that rightly or wrongly this is how alot of people see a large proportion of public sector workers. Seems confirmed by some of the responses. The over time and hours my brother gets as a copper are amazing and his basic wage is good too. (occassionally he get stabbed etc…. but generally eats alot of free fish n chips.)

Have a look at the rest of Europe and pick where you would want to live? if they havent made big cuts yet, they are about to. Everyone is cutting back, its not just the UK.

Good news Johnnie…. you were overdue some.

High Street good then ?

high street superb once we got up there your suggested route was not popular but I know someone recommened ot to you but Donk reckons it adds about an hour and almost all unrideable even by a pro. I did have a spectaculr crash due to pedal strike leaving me upsid edown in ferns on my back with bike in air still clipped in. My stupid cylist buddies actually helped me trather than get a picture of this.
Not sure Ulswater on a hardtail with 80 mm travel is the wisest choice I have ever made mind.

Have a look at the rest of Europe and pick where you would want to live? if they havent made big cuts yet, they are about to. Everyone is cutting back, its not just the UK.

So what are you saying ……….. that public spending cuts in the UK have nothing at all to do with New Labour "mismanagement", but are in fact due to a systematic failure of global capitalism ?

Although your claim that the inevitability of "big cuts" are a universal feature throughout Europe is false. Sweden will have a general election on Sept 19 and all the main parties, both in government and opposition, have pledged big increases in public spending.

http://www.forexyard.com/en/news/Swedish-govt-unveils-post-election-spending-plans-2010-07-08T102346Z

And I doubt whether Sweden is alone, last year the Norwegians elected a government which was pledged to increasing tax and public spending. Of course these countries are social-democratic countries – not neo-liberal, so their priorities are different.

And needless to say, it is a proven fact that capitalism works best and at a more acceptable level, under the Keynesian economic model – although the super-rich do lose out slightly. Which is why the former Republican US President Richard Nixon famously said in 1971, "I am now a Keynesian in economics".

Sadly a decade after Nixon's conversion to Keynesian economics, politicians such as Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher successfully managed to appeal to personal greed and selfishness sufficiently enough, to form governments. And the neo-liberal experiment which had initially started in the dictatorships of Latin America, spread into the Northern Hemisphere. Resulting, predictably, in the mess which we are experiencing today.

Sorry to piss on your bonfire ivantate, but you simply wrong about TINA.

I do so wish all of you a little sceptical about the figures you quote. It is a huge moral panic being stirred up and much of what you quote is simply biased reporting.

Employers are using this to justify removing pension rights from their workers and for the government its a convenient scapegoat.

The simple fact is that the public sector pensions are affordable and not gold plated.

Private firms should be emulating the public sector not trying to get eh public sector to reduce pensions to the miserable levels in the private sector.

Every £1 subsidising public sector pensions thru treasury contributions is dwarfed buy the £& tax relief the private sector gets – most of which goes to the richest few %

Now I fully accept that the TUC stuff is far from impartial but it does show the other sides

Taxpayers are paying £2.50 for subsidising the pensions of the richest one per cent of the population for every pound spent on paying pensions to retired public servants such as nurses, teachers and civil servants, according to new research published today (Wednesday) by the TUC

http://www.tuc.org.uk/pensions/index.cfm?startrow=19&endrow=24

Critics who say that public sector pensions are unaffordable or out of control often misrepresent the figures by presenting pension commitments that go decades into the future as an enormous final demand bill that has to be paid all in one go, says the TUC.

The cost of providing tax relief on pensions in 2007/8 was £37.6 billion according to HMRC figures – ten times the net cost of unfunded public sector pension schemes that are not backed by an investment fund. This is estimated by the Treasury to be £4 billion this year.

stoner – your assumptions make an ass of you again

My 9 months leave was in a private sector organisation because of incompetent management.

Have you no beans to count?

Have a read of the TUC paper you link to. It explodes many of the myths about pensions.

Hands up those that voted labour for the last 13 years! (Rushes off to spend this months pension on nice new shiny bike bits!!)

TJ – which bit of your statement: "This simply is not true as has been demonstrated many times. At the moment public sector pension contributions exceed payouts – ie the government is making money out of it and has done for decades" do you still think was right then?

None of the obfuscation you've copy & pasted above addresses your error. And Im not bothered by any of the "myths" you think I care about. I'm only drawing attention to your error and your inability to admit it.

Every £1 subsidising public sector pensions thru treasury contributions is dwarfed buy the £& tax relief the private sector gets – most of which goes to the richest few %

You do realise that public sector employees ALSO get tax relief on their pension contributions, dont you?

And Id love to see the data behind your assumption any way.

You are wrong. Admit it.

I was wrong to assume your paid leave was while in the public sector.

I cannot find the set of figures again. I cannot thus show you the workings but I believe it was a different selective quote from those you have used. So I cannot prove it to you.

simply put the defined employer contributions cover that gap. IE although its taxpayers money it is defined and in the individual organisations budgets. (Superannuation Contributions Adjusted for Past Experience)IIRC

However – I cannot lay my hands on the figures so You can consider you have won if you like

It does not detract from my central point which is that the whole public sector pensions timebomb is a total myth. its easily affordable, far cheaper than the tax relief on private sector schemes, better value for the taxpayers pound than private schemes and finally gives lower pensions than the average private scheme.

You ire should be directed to the bosses of the companies that don't provide pensions rather than trying to take away the meagre pensions from the public sector – averaging £5000 pa. Take these away and these people will have to rely on benefits instead – at a similar cost to the taxpayer

Open your ideaolgically blinded eyes

Your hatred of everything public sector is rather amusing. Now how much of my tax money is subsidising your pension? When you forgo all tax relief on pensions you can have all the subsidy on mine
Edit – jsut had a check back thru – the deficit you mention is in the unfunded public sector schemes. I was referring to the total of all public sector schemes. So once again you fail to compare like with like

I cannot thus show you the workings but I believe it was a different selective quote from those you have used. So I cannot prove it to you.

Good argument.

You can consider you have won if you like

That's awfully magnanimous of you. Ta.

simply put the defined employer contributions cover that gap. IE although its taxpayers money it is defined and in the individual organisations budgets.

^ Not sure what you're trying to get at here.

[public sector pensions are] far cheaper than the tax relief on private sector schemes, better value for the taxpayers pound than private schemes and finally gives lower pensions than the average private scheme.

You seem to be floundering in a world of non-sequiturs and assumptions there TJ.

pensions payments (where from defined benefit or defined contribution schemes) and tax relief on pensions are not remotely comparable things.

How on earth do public sector defined benefits schemes represent better "value for money for the taxpayer" than say, a defined contribution private sector scheme?

I think we can ignore any daft comparison of an "average" pension payment: what's an average time served at a variable salary rate and variable contribution rate then at a variable retirement? If you've found someone who's done that maths Id love to see it. You cant even find the data to back up your defence of the higher average income in public sector jobs being down to higher proportion of skilled workers than the private sector.

Now how much of my tax money is subsidising your pension?

Nothing like the amount that mine is subsidising your salary TJ I'd bet.

the deficit you mention is in the unfunded public sector schemes.

And just how much do you think ring-fenced "funded" schemes are contributing surpluses to the public sector pension payment budget? Got a figure, or guessing again?

Stoner – have a read thru the articles in here

I won't pretend its impatial ( unlike you do with quoting your partial sources) but it explodes the myths with real good data. You might actually learn something. Loads of good articles if you read theru

http://www.tuc.org.uk/pensions/index.cfm?startrow=1&endrow=6

http://www.tuc.org.uk/pensions/tuc-16929-f0.cfm for example

( unlike you do with quoting your partial sources)

Where? 🙄

And Im not churning through an entire website on your behalf to find any evidence that you yourself obviously cant find to defend any of your points.

http://www.tuc.org.uk/pensions/tuc-16929-f0.cfm

http://www.tuc.org.uk/pensions/tuc-17698-f0.cfm

http://www.tuc.org.uk/pensions/tuc-17165-f0.cfm

http://www.tuc.org.uk/pensions/tuc-16929-f0.cfm

http://www.tuc.org.uk/pensions/tuc-16806-f0.cfm

Just a few of the links. I don't really know why I bother as I am sure you will simply dismiss them out of hand.

The first one is useful and if those figures are correct then your claim that..

Every £1 subsidising public sector pensions thru treasury contributions is dwarfed buy the £& tax relief the private sector gets – most of which goes to the richest few %

…is partially correct; 25% is not "most".

But other than that, then I agree with your point.

It's still not the same as: At the moment public sector pension contributions exceed payouts

Which is the only point I've specifically disagreed with.

FFS you two! Get a room.

Any update Junkyard?

Lots of redundancies in our place announced this week. 390 jobs going in our organisation – 230 jobs to go out of a total of about 1200 on our site, which is a far larger proportion than other sites. I'm not affected this time, but know plenty of people who are, including the rest of the team of a project I spent 9 months on last year, and the group I was with until a couple of years ago (including I think the guy who was my line manager for 10 years). The worrying thing from a personal perspective is whether they actually plan to keep our site open in the long term – my company used to be the largest local employer (though I think we may now have been overtaken by local government!) so not good for the local area. People being made redundant are mostly specialist scientists and engineers for which there isn't a vast amount of other work around here.

Oh, and apparently about 300 more to be announced in 6 weeks – though I suppose it's possible our site might escape most of this.