Rely on the State (UK) and you will die poor

  • Context: News 
  • Thread starter Thread starter GENIERE
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    State Uk
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the implications of relying on state pensions in the UK, particularly in light of a 2005 article from The Times that highlights concerns about a pensions crisis. Participants explore various perspectives on pension systems, privatization, and the broader implications for retirement security in both the UK and the US.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express skepticism about the figures mentioned in the article, requesting links to the original source.
  • There is a comparison made between UK pension privatization and the privatization ideas proposed during George W. Bush's presidency regarding Social Security.
  • One participant suggests that the current trajectory of pension systems may lead to a lack of clarity about future outcomes.
  • Another participant discusses the challenges faced by older airlines in the US and how they manage pension obligations, suggesting that new companies are more competitive due to not carrying the same burdens.
  • Concerns are raised about the reliance of baby boomers on Social Security, with uncertainty expressed about the political landscape affecting future benefits.
  • There is a mention of the tendency for individuals to cash out retirement plans, which may hinder long-term savings.
  • One participant reflects on the impact of past financial crises, such as the Enron scandal, on retirement funds.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views, with some agreeing on the challenges of relying on state pensions and the implications of privatization, while others raise concerns about the effectiveness of private retirement plans. The discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing perspectives presented.

Contextual Notes

Some arguments depend on specific definitions of pension systems and assumptions about economic conditions, which are not fully explored in the discussion.

GENIERE
The Times October 28, 2005
Rely on the State and you will die poor, figures show

BY NICOLA WOOLCOCK

… half of working age people will rely solely on the State in their old age, according to government figures published yesterday that reveal the full extent of the pensions crisis.
.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
... oooook...

does this series of words have a website associated with it?
 
The figures may show, but I'm having trouble seeing the figures themselves...need links.
 
GENIERE said:
The Times October 28, 2005
Rely on the State and you will die poor, figures show
BY NICOLA WOOLCOCK
… half of working age people will rely solely on the State in their old age, according to government figures published yesterday that reveal the full extent of the pensions crisis.
.

A link would be nice.

I remember an argument that the UK pension privatization is similar to Bushco's idea for SS.
 
Well the way its going we're never going to find out. And I had no idea Bush was actually a corporation. Sounds very immature.
 
Pengwuino said:
Well the way its going we're never going to find out. And I had no idea Bush was actually a corporation. Sounds very immature.
Bushco=Bush and company. He rarely makes decisions, he is manipulated by his handlers. It is inaccurate to characterize his decisions as his own so I use the term Bushco.

Harriet Miers is a good example of why he rarely makes his own calls.
 
Skyhunter said:
Bushco=Bush and company. He rarely makes decisions, he is manipulated by his handlers. It is inaccurate to characterize his decisions as his own so I use the term Bushco.

Tell that to the liberals on this board, they'll eat you.
 
Never understimate our laziness
 
  • #10
Pengwuino said:
Tell that to the liberals on this board, they'll eat you.
There are worse fates than being eaten by a libleral.:-p
 
  • #11
Skyhunter said:
There are worse fates than being eaten by a libleral.:-p

Yah, like being attacked by a mob of little festering drooling children.
 
  • #12
Evo - Please delete posts 6, 7, 9, 10, 11
 
  • #13
lol there we go turning threads into crap again
 
  • #14
and #13:biggrin:
 
  • #15
And the situation looks to be different in the US?

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1122017,00.html
Past union victories haven't turned out as beneficial to employees as they might have thought.

New airlines that aren't carrying around the same retirements benefits burdens as the old airlines are driving the old into bankruptcy - where the old airlines bail out of their pension obligations and re-emerge from bankruptcy more streamlined and better able to compete. Of course, the alternative is the company just goes out of business completely, once again leaving retirees holding the bag. Now, other industries are beginning to see how they, too, can be more competitive against a lot of their domestic and foreign competitors.

That's one reason I liked the idea of 401(k)'s and other private retirement plans. Of course, the average person seems to cash theirs in every time they change jobs and never really build up a retirement plan (that's their fault).

Suffice it to say, there will be a huge number of baby boomers relying on those Social Security checks, hoping future workers don't start electing Congressmen willing to cut Social Security benefits. I'm not sure how realistic that hope is.
 
  • #16
BobG said:
That's one reason I liked the idea of 401(k)'s and other private retirement plans. Of course, the average person seems to cash theirs in every time they change jobs and never really build up a retirement plan (that's their fault).

Suffice it to say, there will be a huge number of baby boomers relying on those Social Security checks, hoping future workers don't start electing Congressmen willing to cut Social Security benefits. I'm not sure how realistic that hope is.
Agreed, agreed, agreed, agreed, and agreed. Did I miss anything?
 
  • #17
BobG said:
That's one reason I liked the idea of 401(k)'s and other private retirement plans. Of course, the average person seems to cash theirs in every time they change jobs and never really build up a retirement plan (that's their fault).
Suffice it to say, there will be a huge number of baby boomers relying on those Social Security checks, hoping future workers don't start electing Congressmen willing to cut Social Security benefits. I'm not sure how realistic that hope is.
Pity about all those funds that invested in Enron.:frown:
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 74 ·
3
Replies
74
Views
19K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
7K
  • · Replies 42 ·
2
Replies
42
Views
7K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
5K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
7K
  • · Replies 69 ·
3
Replies
69
Views
14K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
4K