Torrevieja Forum

Here you can discuss anything that you wish.
( Within Reason !!!! )

Moderator: Moderator

#1101401
As I wrote elsewhere:

What a load of tosh!

My son left the Civil Service in 2002, and will be eligible to receive his Civil Service pension when he reaches the age of 60. Those are the rules of that scheme, and he will still not get his State Pension, to which he is also entitled, until he reaches the same age as everyone else, just like the person mentioned in the linked piece.

This is a typical example of how the owner of this rag, Richard Desmond, likes to give the Conservatives a kicking. All because they have the temerity to refuse to give him at least a knighthood, although he believes that he is worth putting in the House of Lords.

And it's a bit rich coming from the multi-millionaire Desmond who hasn't increased the pay for any of his reporting staff for about 10 years, refuses to allow them to unionise, and keeps them all on zero hours contracts.

Just to add, the Civil Service needs, desperately, to pay really decent salaries to attract good staff. And part of the package is the salary based pension. The problem is that they don't pay enough, so most of the good ones leave and join the private sector where they are treated, financially, far better.
#1101406
Mrs Nelson wrote:
Sun Oct 29, 2017 10:55 am
He will probably retire, have a week off and land a nice consultancy board or similar golden egg type job.

You would think the rules that apply to him would also apply to teachers nurses and doctors, surely we need the best people in that line of work too ?

They can, and do. My GP retired on Friday, and after a short holiday, he is going into private practice whilst collecting his NHS pension. He is not leaving the NHS because of poor remuneration (he has lived on a six figure from the NHS for a number of years) but he wants to lead a less stressful life.

Good luck to him, I say.

And teachers, police officers, firemen, and so on, have been doing this for the last 50 or so years. Taking retirement from their government paid employment, and joining the private sector. That's what happens in a free society; we can do whatever we like provided that it is legal.
#1101418
What needs to be appreciated is that the UK has virtually cut unemployment to zero. Yes, there are around 1.5 million who are registered as not having a job, but most of them are unemployable for oh, so many reasons. One of which is that they consider the job beneath their dignity, so would rather sit on their plastic sofa and watch constant re-runs of the Jeremy Kyle show.

Why is that there are still thousands of people coming into the UK every month, yet the unemployment figure has been consistently dropping for years. The answer is that the UK enjoys full employment.
#1101435
old boy wrote:
Sun Oct 29, 2017 6:09 pm
What needs to be appreciated is that the UK has virtually cut unemployment to zero. Yes, there are around 1.5 million who are registered as not having a job, but most of them are unemployable for oh, so many reasons. One of which is that they consider the job beneath their dignity, so would rather sit on their plastic sofa and watch constant re-runs of the Jeremy Kyle show.

Why is that there are still thousands of people coming into the UK every month, yet the unemployment figure has been consistently dropping for years. The answer is that the UK enjoys full employment.

Full employment maybe?

I doubt if we could send you guys back to work to what this government calls a job, you would be doing cartwheels. Statistics are just lies.

I’m sure some decent jobs are being created however I’m going to argue that many of these zero hour low pay jobs are not worth getting out of bed for, but since the government has made claiming benefit impossible it’s only logical people are going to take on a rotten job and somehow justify this claim that there is full employment.

Kev
#1101440
soapydave, you claim the government broke it's contract with you. Did you and a member of any government sign a piece of paper guaranteeing you a pension when you reached a certain age? No, of course you didn't, any more than you had a binding agreement with any government that the rates of tax would never go down. So, why aren't you moaning about that?

It is not the government's fault that you chose to make little effort to provide sufficient income for your retirement; that was your choice. We are now in 2017, and the changes in State Retirement ages have been known for years and all financial advisors should have been telling their clients to make provision for the changes.

As for my now semi-retired doctor, he is still comparatively young and he could have chosen to remain the senior partner in the medical practice. He doesn't want to stop working completely, so is going into private practice, opening up a position for a new NHS doctor to join the local practice.

That's what happens in a free market economy.
#1101441
Mrs Nelson, you cannot just pick what statistics you like, and believe them to be true whilst calling anything that you don't like to be lies. You have indicated in the past that you believe the immigration figures, but now you want to discredit the statistics about unemployment that comes from the same source.

As a rule of thumb, employers like the years of high unemployment because they can pick and chose who the want to employ, and they have, in the past, subjected their employees to rather poor working conditions. As much as you dislike zero hours contracts, there are vast swathes of staff that actually chose to have them. Take McDonalds, for example, because it was becoming difficult to recruit staff due to a lack of suitable candidates, they decided to give all their staff the opportunity to either take full time contracts or zero hours contracts. More than 50% of the staff took the decision to re-sign on zero hours contracts.

Unfortunately, the welfare benefits system has been abused for far too long in the UK. I don't necessarily agree with all the changes that have been made lately, but something desperately needed to be done to make it preferable to be working rather than sitting at home watching the box 24 hours a day.

One further point. Blame should also be laid at the feet of the person who conceived the idea of Working Tax Credits. That did more to help squeeze down wages than anything that I can remember. It was introduced in 2003.
#1101447
[quote=soapydave post_id=1101431 time=1509347487 user_id=24147]
when I left school at 15 ,I got a job and paid N.I, AND TAX, the government entered into a contract with me telling me if I paid my dues I would retire and receive my state pension at 65 years of age, they have now broken that contract and moved the goal posts ,do you think that is fair, I was relying on my state pension as many will have to thru no fault of there own ,eg ill health ,or such like.
the problem is that todays workers are paying for todays pensioners that don't really need it as they made a killing on the property market,and got works pensions when the going was good in the good old days, why not put some form of tax on property sales profit from what they paid to what they sell at, eg if they bought in the 1960s for £ 2,000 and sold in the 1990s for 200,000 tax the difference :o were as todays youth struggle to get on the property ladder and if they do the wages/ earnings go on paying the mortgage,food, ever increasing electric etc and cant afford to pay into a private pension ,not everyone has a private pension,to fall back on,
and you should,nt call people with plastic sofas, perhaps that's all they can afford :cry:
when I was a lad we had a plastic sofa ,because that's all we could afford, although both my parents worked hard,but we always had good food on the table.
[/quote]


I will not be around in about 20 years but somewhere and probably on a forum similar to this one ,someone will be typing the same as you about pensioners and house prices
I left school at 14 and have worked in a variety of jobs including 9 years in the army and all for a pittance army pay on joining one pound and ten shillings and you sent your mum ten shillings of that ,but drink and tobacco was cheap ,the youth of today go back packing all over the world and then look for a job so nothing changes it is all to do with what is available and inflation ,so the tax paid today is just the same as we paid and our stamps
So please don1t keep on about keeping pensioners because we did the same keeping pensioners of yesteryear
Chas
#1101449
old boy wrote:
Mon Oct 30, 2017 10:12 am
Mrs Nelson, you cannot just pick what statistics you like, and believe them to be true whilst calling anything that you don't like to be lies. You have indicated in the past that you believe the immigration figures, but now you want to discredit the statistics about unemployment that comes from the same source.

As a rule of thumb, employers like the years of high unemployment because they can pick and chose who the want to employ, and they have, in the past, subjected their employees to rather poor working conditions. As much as you dislike zero hours contracts, there are vast swathes of staff that actually chose to have them. Take McDonalds, for example, because it was becoming difficult to recruit staff due to a lack of suitable candidates, they decided to give all their staff the opportunity to either take full time contracts or zero hours contracts. More than 50% of the staff took the decision to re-sign on zero hours contracts.

Unfortunately, the welfare benefits system has been abused for far too long in the UK. I don't necessarily agree with all the changes that have been made lately, but something desperately needed to be done to make it preferable to be working rather than sitting at home watching the box 24 hours a day.

One further point. Blame should also be laid at the feet of the person who conceived the idea of Working Tax Credits. That did more to help squeeze down wages than anything that I can remember. It was introduced in 2003.
Sorry old boy, I’m not disputing the figures. I’m just suggesting that if it wasn’t for the tax payer underpinning low pay via benefits, and the cruel changes to the benefit system, the take up of these awful jobs wouldn’t be so large, obviously able bodied people shouldn’t live on the dole but at the same time low pay shouldn’t be a form of punishment for one group and a reward for the other. I’d like to see the drastic re-evaluation that has been applied to handouts applied to employment. So I’d start with the definition of being employed, this would stipulate that being employed relieves the tax payer off the liability to pay ones rent and passes this responsibility to the employer.

You say we have full employment, I suggest we have a couple of million unemployed people who are slaves to a hundred quid a week employer.

Kev

Thank you :D Liar.jpg

Hey napoleon You should learn to read, I’m[…]

Mens Suit Shop

Try Astoria in Torrevieja, they stock classy cloth[…]

Windrush

Wise words dave, Kev do you know there is only o[…]

Just be prepared, I thought I had sorted all my pr[…]

Bug based snacks in carrefour

I disagree What about drout and deforestation t[…]

RIP Dale Winton

For Christ’s sake are you still at it. I del[…]

Alan, try putting a dab of savalon or similar crea[…]

New Advertising Slots and Possibilities