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

  • Thread starter Thread starter GENIERE
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    State Uk
AI Thread Summary
Recent government figures indicate that half of working-age individuals in the UK will depend entirely on state pensions in their retirement, highlighting a significant pensions crisis. The discussion references comparisons between UK pension privatization and U.S. Social Security reform proposals, suggesting skepticism about the effectiveness of privatization. Concerns are raised about the sustainability of Social Security, particularly for the baby boomer generation, who may face reduced benefits if future political decisions favor cuts. The conversation also touches on the challenges of traditional pension plans, with examples from the airline industry illustrating how companies are navigating pension obligations. The effectiveness of 401(k) plans is debated, noting that many individuals fail to accumulate sufficient retirement savings due to frequent job changes. Overall, the dialogue underscores the precarious nature of retirement planning and the reliance on government support.
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
Views
17K
Replies
8
Views
3K
Replies
7
Views
7K
Replies
42
Views
7K
Replies
10
Views
3K
Replies
33
Views
6K
Back
Top