LEAVE the Conservative Party and save your country!
Comments
-
It is a little commented on fact that the next lot coming through have fallen into the gaping chasm between DB schemes ending and auto-enrolment not starting.First.Aspect said:
No. Aside from anything else the threshold of "wealthy" would include lots of people who are nowhere near. And there would be knock on effects of the resulting poverty that could cost more.rick_chasey said:Thing is, with unemployment social security, you're ultimately trying to get them back into work (and it's means tested) and you're working to reduce unemployment.
With retirement social security, you're ultimately trying to get them to take it for a long as possible by keeping them alive, and it's very hard to reduce the numbers of retired with an aging population.
Surely if we decide we want to keep it as generous as it currently is we're gonna have to massively hike the retirement age?
Is there a case for means testing pensions? Surely at this point they're so material it makes sense?
This is another example of your war on the old, RC. You have this image of wealthy serial cruise holidaying permatan boomers. They are going to die soon. The next generation going through are the first who have been royally screwed by boomer house mega-inflation and the fact that the UK has been sold to investors from under them, and you are proposing to give them another shafting.
Your lot are only 10-15 years behind. Blink and you'll miss it.0 -
He wants to live in the US where its survival of the fittest, wages are vast and everything is plentify for those who have ambition, and if you didn't earn it you didn't deserve to. There's no luck involved.wallace_and_gromit said:
I'm probably being dense here, but I still can't pin down your precise point. Can you just spell it out, please? Thanks!rick_chasey said:It's a rather disingenuous list above once you line them all up together:
https://data.oecd.org/pension/net-pension-replacement-rates.htm < UK is below the EU 27 average (Netherlands is a whopping 89%).
It's a tool economists sometimes use to evaluate how generous or not the pension is.
And anyone enriched by efforts not their own should have that wealth removed.
It's an interesting mix of far right and far left, but I'm not convinced that it has yet been synthesised into a coherent political philosophy.
In fact, it could just be a chip on his shoulder.1 -
However, anyone entering the workplace from the late 80s onwards should have know that retirement provision was largely going to be up to themselves.surrey_commuter said:
It is a little commented on fact that the next lot coming through have fallen into the gaping chasm between DB schemes ending and auto-enrolment not starting.First.Aspect said:
No. Aside from anything else the threshold of "wealthy" would include lots of people who are nowhere near. And there would be knock on effects of the resulting poverty that could cost more.rick_chasey said:Thing is, with unemployment social security, you're ultimately trying to get them back into work (and it's means tested) and you're working to reduce unemployment.
With retirement social security, you're ultimately trying to get them to take it for a long as possible by keeping them alive, and it's very hard to reduce the numbers of retired with an aging population.
Surely if we decide we want to keep it as generous as it currently is we're gonna have to massively hike the retirement age?
Is there a case for means testing pensions? Surely at this point they're so material it makes sense?
This is another example of your war on the old, RC. You have this image of wealthy serial cruise holidaying permatan boomers. They are going to die soon. The next generation going through are the first who have been royally screwed by boomer house mega-inflation and the fact that the UK has been sold to investors from under them, and you are proposing to give them another shafting.
Your lot are only 10-15 years behind. Blink and you'll miss it.
But given people prefer to spend than save, I do agree.
In part that goes back to the pathetic attempt stakeholder was to get people saving, and Brown's initial raid on the pension funds......0 -
You will have to expand on that point about actuaries. My understanding was that the triple lock was brought in to make the state pension more generous over time. As a policy it has worked perfectly, it just lacks the political will to stop the auto increaserick_chasey said:
Yeah, I guess you'd have to scale it in some way.pangolin said:They'd have to be very careful if means testing that they didn't create a wide band where people just don't bother saving
I dunno. The actuaries got it very wrong on the cost of the triple lock so it's hard to calibrate these things well.0 -
I think the prediction is it would cost c.3x less than it has actually cost.surrey_commuter said:
You will have to expand on that point about actuaries. My understanding was that the triple lock was brought in to make the state pension more generous over time. As a policy it has worked perfectly, it just lacks the political will to stop the auto increaserick_chasey said:
Yeah, I guess you'd have to scale it in some way.pangolin said:They'd have to be very careful if means testing that they didn't create a wide band where people just don't bother saving
I dunno. The actuaries got it very wrong on the cost of the triple lock so it's hard to calibrate these things well.
I think the current system of social security is literally unsustainable, particularly given demographics, so we need to be realistic about what we can and can't afford and have a genuine political discussion about how to re-structure the social security system.
That's what politics is about ultimately; deciding between competing interests.0 -
No real point, just worth looking at how generous or not the UK is to its retired versus other similar countries.wallace_and_gromit said:
I'm probably being dense here, but I still can't pin down your precise point. Can you just spell it out, please? Thanks!rick_chasey said:It's a rather disingenuous list above once you line them all up together:
https://data.oecd.org/pension/net-pension-replacement-rates.htm < UK is below the EU 27 average (Netherlands is a whopping 89%).
It's a tool economists sometimes use to evaluate how generous or not the pension is.
0 -
Is theirs any more sustainable than ours?rick_chasey said:
No real point, just worth looking at how generous or not the UK is to its retired versus other similar countries.wallace_and_gromit said:
I'm probably being dense here, but I still can't pin down your precise point. Can you just spell it out, please? Thanks!rick_chasey said:It's a rather disingenuous list above once you line them all up together:
https://data.oecd.org/pension/net-pension-replacement-rates.htm < UK is below the EU 27 average (Netherlands is a whopping 89%).
It's a tool economists sometimes use to evaluate how generous or not the pension is.
France's isn't, I know that much.0 -
Yeah it's called a meritocracy. It's not that unusual. It's a concept that's been around since Plato, and probably before him.First.Aspect said:
He wants to live in the US where its survival of the fittest, wages are vast and everything is plentify for those who have ambition, and if you didn't earn it you didn't deserve to. There's no luck involved.wallace_and_gromit said:
I'm probably being dense here, but I still can't pin down your precise point. Can you just spell it out, please? Thanks!rick_chasey said:It's a rather disingenuous list above once you line them all up together:
https://data.oecd.org/pension/net-pension-replacement-rates.htm < UK is below the EU 27 average (Netherlands is a whopping 89%).
It's a tool economists sometimes use to evaluate how generous or not the pension is.
And anyone enriched by efforts not their own should have that wealth removed.
It's an interesting mix of far right and far left, but I'm not convinced that it has yet been synthesised into a coherent political philosophy.
In fact, it could just be a chip on his shoulder.0 -
So are you now saying pensioners in the UK are relatively poor?rick_chasey said:It's a rather disingenuous list above once you line them all up together:
https://data.oecd.org/pension/net-pension-replacement-rates.htm < UK is below the EU 27 average (Netherlands is a whopping 89%).
It's a tool economists sometimes use to evaluate how generous or not the pension is.
I want to move to Turkey and then retire to earn more. I'm trying to work out how they manage that, is it just their wages are low (maybe due to the amount they pay into a state pension scheme) or do they have to work until they are really old or is there some witchcraft involved?0 -
Well I guess the bolded bit!rick_chasey said:
No real point, just worth looking at how generous or not the UK is to its retired versus other similar countries.wallace_and_gromit said:
I'm probably being dense here, but I still can't pin down your precise point. Can you just spell it out, please? Thanks!rick_chasey said:It's a rather disingenuous list above once you line them all up together:
https://data.oecd.org/pension/net-pension-replacement-rates.htm < UK is below the EU 27 average (Netherlands is a whopping 89%).
It's a tool economists sometimes use to evaluate how generous or not the pension is.
The UK state pension can't really be considered separately from the overall pension system with tax-break incentivised contributions to private / company schemes, and means-tested benefits to top up low pensioner income.
0 -
I think the initial Tweet (and presumably his point) was that UK pensions are high in relation to earnings despite the comment the Tweet was responding to about the Left trying to cancel triple-lock when pensions should actually double.wallace_and_gromit said:
I'm probably being dense here, but I still can't pin down your precise point. Can you just spell it out, please? Thanks!rick_chasey said:It's a rather disingenuous list above once you line them all up together:
https://data.oecd.org/pension/net-pension-replacement-rates.htm < UK is below the EU 27 average (Netherlands is a whopping 89%).
It's a tool economists sometimes use to evaluate how generous or not the pension is.
However, he then seemed to go on to admit that the rate in the UK is actually lower than the EU average and that the information in the Tweet was disingenuous (I'm shocked that anyone on Twitter would do such a thing).0 -
I guess that's why it's a net figurewallace_and_gromit said:
Well I guess the bolded bit!rick_chasey said:
No real point, just worth looking at how generous or not the UK is to its retired versus other similar countries.wallace_and_gromit said:
I'm probably being dense here, but I still can't pin down your precise point. Can you just spell it out, please? Thanks!rick_chasey said:It's a rather disingenuous list above once you line them all up together:
https://data.oecd.org/pension/net-pension-replacement-rates.htm < UK is below the EU 27 average (Netherlands is a whopping 89%).
It's a tool economists sometimes use to evaluate how generous or not the pension is.
The UK state pension can't really be considered separately from the overall pension system with tax-break incentivised contributions to private / company schemes, and means-tested benefits to top up low pensioner income.
0 -
Yes but your version pre-supposes people are on an equal footing to begin with, which they are not. Even basic ability is a genetic lottery.rick_chasey said:
Yeah it's called a meritocracy. It's not that unusual. It's a concept that's been around since Plato, and probably before him.First.Aspect said:
He wants to live in the US where its survival of the fittest, wages are vast and everything is plentify for those who have ambition, and if you didn't earn it you didn't deserve to. There's no luck involved.wallace_and_gromit said:
I'm probably being dense here, but I still can't pin down your precise point. Can you just spell it out, please? Thanks!rick_chasey said:It's a rather disingenuous list above once you line them all up together:
https://data.oecd.org/pension/net-pension-replacement-rates.htm < UK is below the EU 27 average (Netherlands is a whopping 89%).
It's a tool economists sometimes use to evaluate how generous or not the pension is.
And anyone enriched by efforts not their own should have that wealth removed.
It's an interesting mix of far right and far left, but I'm not convinced that it has yet been synthesised into a coherent political philosophy.
In fact, it could just be a chip on his shoulder.0 -
I wasn't commenting on the content of the post and the linked Twittery things. I was just curious as to why you'd made the post you did.rick_chasey said:
I guess that's why it's a net figurewallace_and_gromit said:
Well I guess the bolded bit!rick_chasey said:
No real point, just worth looking at how generous or not the UK is to its retired versus other similar countries.wallace_and_gromit said:
I'm probably being dense here, but I still can't pin down your precise point. Can you just spell it out, please? Thanks!rick_chasey said:It's a rather disingenuous list above once you line them all up together:
https://data.oecd.org/pension/net-pension-replacement-rates.htm < UK is below the EU 27 average (Netherlands is a whopping 89%).
It's a tool economists sometimes use to evaluate how generous or not the pension is.
The UK state pension can't really be considered separately from the overall pension system with tax-break incentivised contributions to private / company schemes, and means-tested benefits to top up low pensioner income.0 -
What is the world coming to?Pross said:...the information in the Tweet was disingenuous (I'm shocked that anyone on Twitter would do such a thing).
0 -
It was a measure I'd not seen before and I think it makes a lot of sense.wallace_and_gromit said:
I wasn't commenting on the content of the post and the linked Twittery things. I was just curious as to why you'd made the post you did.rick_chasey said:
I guess that's why it's a net figurewallace_and_gromit said:
Well I guess the bolded bit!rick_chasey said:
No real point, just worth looking at how generous or not the UK is to its retired versus other similar countries.wallace_and_gromit said:
I'm probably being dense here, but I still can't pin down your precise point. Can you just spell it out, please? Thanks!rick_chasey said:It's a rather disingenuous list above once you line them all up together:
https://data.oecd.org/pension/net-pension-replacement-rates.htm < UK is below the EU 27 average (Netherlands is a whopping 89%).
It's a tool economists sometimes use to evaluate how generous or not the pension is.
The UK state pension can't really be considered separately from the overall pension system with tax-break incentivised contributions to private / company schemes, and means-tested benefits to top up low pensioner income.0 -
It is strange that the only people I "know" who use and reference Twitter are on here.Pross said:
I think the initial Tweet (and presumably his point) was that UK pensions are high in relation to earnings despite the comment the Tweet was responding to about the Left trying to cancel triple-lock when pensions should actually double.wallace_and_gromit said:
I'm probably being dense here, but I still can't pin down your precise point. Can you just spell it out, please? Thanks!rick_chasey said:It's a rather disingenuous list above once you line them all up together:
https://data.oecd.org/pension/net-pension-replacement-rates.htm < UK is below the EU 27 average (Netherlands is a whopping 89%).
It's a tool economists sometimes use to evaluate how generous or not the pension is.
However, he then seemed to go on to admit that the rate in the UK is actually lower than the EU average and that the information in the Tweet was disingenuous (I'm shocked that anyone on Twitter would do such a thing).
Nowhere else in my life do people reference Twitter or have an opinion on it's ownership or future prospects.
I draw no conclusions from that.0 -
I concur.surrey_commuter said:
It is strange that the only people I "know" who use and reference Twitter are on here.Pross said:
I think the initial Tweet (and presumably his point) was that UK pensions are high in relation to earnings despite the comment the Tweet was responding to about the Left trying to cancel triple-lock when pensions should actually double.wallace_and_gromit said:
I'm probably being dense here, but I still can't pin down your precise point. Can you just spell it out, please? Thanks!rick_chasey said:It's a rather disingenuous list above once you line them all up together:
https://data.oecd.org/pension/net-pension-replacement-rates.htm < UK is below the EU 27 average (Netherlands is a whopping 89%).
It's a tool economists sometimes use to evaluate how generous or not the pension is.
However, he then seemed to go on to admit that the rate in the UK is actually lower than the EU average and that the information in the Tweet was disingenuous (I'm shocked that anyone on Twitter would do such a thing).
Nowhere else in my life do people reference Twitter or have an opinion on it's ownership or future prospects.
I draw no conclusions from that.
In fact, I doubt I know anyone who uses Twitter/X, and that includes the young.The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
I bet not a lot of the people who know these posters in real life are aware of their views on Twitter thoughsurrey_commuter said:
It is strange that the only people I "know" who use and reference Twitter are on here.Pross said:
I think the initial Tweet (and presumably his point) was that UK pensions are high in relation to earnings despite the comment the Tweet was responding to about the Left trying to cancel triple-lock when pensions should actually double.wallace_and_gromit said:
I'm probably being dense here, but I still can't pin down your precise point. Can you just spell it out, please? Thanks!rick_chasey said:It's a rather disingenuous list above once you line them all up together:
https://data.oecd.org/pension/net-pension-replacement-rates.htm < UK is below the EU 27 average (Netherlands is a whopping 89%).
It's a tool economists sometimes use to evaluate how generous or not the pension is.
However, he then seemed to go on to admit that the rate in the UK is actually lower than the EU average and that the information in the Tweet was disingenuous (I'm shocked that anyone on Twitter would do such a thing).
Nowhere else in my life do people reference Twitter or have an opinion on it's ownership or future prospects.
I draw no conclusions from that.- Genesis Croix de Fer
- Dolan Tuono0 -
😆First.Aspect said:
He wants to live in the US where its survival of the fittest, wages are vast and everything is plentify for those who have ambition, and if you didn't earn it you didn't deserve to. There's no luck involved.wallace_and_gromit said:
I'm probably being dense here, but I still can't pin down your precise point. Can you just spell it out, please? Thanks!rick_chasey said:It's a rather disingenuous list above once you line them all up together:
https://data.oecd.org/pension/net-pension-replacement-rates.htm < UK is below the EU 27 average (Netherlands is a whopping 89%).
It's a tool economists sometimes use to evaluate how generous or not the pension is.
And anyone enriched by efforts not their own should have that wealth removed.
It's an interesting mix of far right and far left, but I'm not convinced that it has yet been synthesised into a coherent political philosophy.
In fact, it could just be a chip on his shoulder.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
You two are sounding like that legendary DM article from the 90s disputing the importance of the internet.pblakeney said:
I concur.surrey_commuter said:
It is strange that the only people I "know" who use and reference Twitter are on here.Pross said:
I think the initial Tweet (and presumably his point) was that UK pensions are high in relation to earnings despite the comment the Tweet was responding to about the Left trying to cancel triple-lock when pensions should actually double.wallace_and_gromit said:
I'm probably being dense here, but I still can't pin down your precise point. Can you just spell it out, please? Thanks!rick_chasey said:It's a rather disingenuous list above once you line them all up together:
https://data.oecd.org/pension/net-pension-replacement-rates.htm < UK is below the EU 27 average (Netherlands is a whopping 89%).
It's a tool economists sometimes use to evaluate how generous or not the pension is.
However, he then seemed to go on to admit that the rate in the UK is actually lower than the EU average and that the information in the Tweet was disingenuous (I'm shocked that anyone on Twitter would do such a thing).
Nowhere else in my life do people reference Twitter or have an opinion on it's ownership or future prospects.
I draw no conclusions from that.
In fact, I doubt I know anyone who uses Twitter/X, and that includes the young.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
Well, it's an opinion. I just think Twitter/X is mostly used by the media and people interested in opinions. My opinion (🤣) is that opinions are like arseholes....rjsterry said:
You two are sounding like that legendary DM article from the 90s disputing the importance of the internet.pblakeney said:
I concur.surrey_commuter said:
It is strange that the only people I "know" who use and reference Twitter are on here.Pross said:
I think the initial Tweet (and presumably his point) was that UK pensions are high in relation to earnings despite the comment the Tweet was responding to about the Left trying to cancel triple-lock when pensions should actually double.wallace_and_gromit said:
I'm probably being dense here, but I still can't pin down your precise point. Can you just spell it out, please? Thanks!rick_chasey said:It's a rather disingenuous list above once you line them all up together:
https://data.oecd.org/pension/net-pension-replacement-rates.htm < UK is below the EU 27 average (Netherlands is a whopping 89%).
It's a tool economists sometimes use to evaluate how generous or not the pension is.
However, he then seemed to go on to admit that the rate in the UK is actually lower than the EU average and that the information in the Tweet was disingenuous (I'm shocked that anyone on Twitter would do such a thing).
Nowhere else in my life do people reference Twitter or have an opinion on it's ownership or future prospects.
I draw no conclusions from that.
In fact, I doubt I know anyone who uses Twitter/X, and that includes the young.The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
Is this one of those rare occassions when you agree with me?rjsterry said:
You two are sounding like that legendary DM article from the 90s disputing the importance of the internet.pblakeney said:
I concur.surrey_commuter said:
It is strange that the only people I "know" who use and reference Twitter are on here.Pross said:
I think the initial Tweet (and presumably his point) was that UK pensions are high in relation to earnings despite the comment the Tweet was responding to about the Left trying to cancel triple-lock when pensions should actually double.wallace_and_gromit said:
I'm probably being dense here, but I still can't pin down your precise point. Can you just spell it out, please? Thanks!rick_chasey said:It's a rather disingenuous list above once you line them all up together:
https://data.oecd.org/pension/net-pension-replacement-rates.htm < UK is below the EU 27 average (Netherlands is a whopping 89%).
It's a tool economists sometimes use to evaluate how generous or not the pension is.
However, he then seemed to go on to admit that the rate in the UK is actually lower than the EU average and that the information in the Tweet was disingenuous (I'm shocked that anyone on Twitter would do such a thing).
Nowhere else in my life do people reference Twitter or have an opinion on it's ownership or future prospects.
I draw no conclusions from that.
In fact, I doubt I know anyone who uses Twitter/X, and that includes the young.0 -
And there is the key point.First.Aspect said:
Is theirs any more sustainable than ours?rick_chasey said:
No real point, just worth looking at how generous or not the UK is to its retired versus other similar countries.wallace_and_gromit said:
I'm probably being dense here, but I still can't pin down your precise point. Can you just spell it out, please? Thanks!rick_chasey said:It's a rather disingenuous list above once you line them all up together:
https://data.oecd.org/pension/net-pension-replacement-rates.htm < UK is below the EU 27 average (Netherlands is a whopping 89%).
It's a tool economists sometimes use to evaluate how generous or not the pension is.
France's isn't, I know that much.
Also is Rick saying that he hates Dutch Boomers even more than UK ones?"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Anyone older than RC = "boomer"Stevo_666 said:
And there is the key point.First.Aspect said:
Is theirs any more sustainable than ours?rick_chasey said:
No real point, just worth looking at how generous or not the UK is to its retired versus other similar countries.wallace_and_gromit said:
I'm probably being dense here, but I still can't pin down your precise point. Can you just spell it out, please? Thanks!rick_chasey said:It's a rather disingenuous list above once you line them all up together:
https://data.oecd.org/pension/net-pension-replacement-rates.htm < UK is below the EU 27 average (Netherlands is a whopping 89%).
It's a tool economists sometimes use to evaluate how generous or not the pension is.
France's isn't, I know that much.
Also is Rick saying that he hates Dutch Boomers even more than UK ones?0 -
That's certainly true, and from my recollection of the insurance industry at that time, if one paid into the company DB scheme and made a few AVCs then you'd be fine. Recalling conversations with my Uni mates who graduated into numerous different industries, a "2/3 final salary with 10%-15% contributions" was fairly standard.Dorset_Boy said:
However, anyone entering the workplace from the late 80s onwards should have know that retirement provision was largely going to be up to themselves.surrey_commuter said:
It is a little commented on fact that the next lot coming through have fallen into the gaping chasm between DB schemes ending and auto-enrolment not starting.First.Aspect said:
No. Aside from anything else the threshold of "wealthy" would include lots of people who are nowhere near. And there would be knock on effects of the resulting poverty that could cost more.rick_chasey said:Thing is, with unemployment social security, you're ultimately trying to get them back into work (and it's means tested) and you're working to reduce unemployment.
With retirement social security, you're ultimately trying to get them to take it for a long as possible by keeping them alive, and it's very hard to reduce the numbers of retired with an aging population.
Surely if we decide we want to keep it as generous as it currently is we're gonna have to massively hike the retirement age?
Is there a case for means testing pensions? Surely at this point they're so material it makes sense?
This is another example of your war on the old, RC. You have this image of wealthy serial cruise holidaying permatan boomers. They are going to die soon. The next generation going through are the first who have been royally screwed by boomer house mega-inflation and the fact that the UK has been sold to investors from under them, and you are proposing to give them another shafting.
Your lot are only 10-15 years behind. Blink and you'll miss it.
The real kick in the nadgers came when DB schemes started closing, as the typical replacement DC scheme was nowhere as good. (Lower or non-existent employer contributions and no guarantees.)
I can remember the days (early / mid 90s) where one of the big political issues was that companies were over-funding their pension schemes to reduce their tax bill. Imagine that. I don't think the youngsters of today could imagine an over-funded pension scheme any more than they can a world where you needed to book one of the office two PCs (for use for 30 of us) to use Lotus123 before WYSIWYG graphics were a thing.
0 -
As a Gen X'er I'm offended, getting lumped in with all those old f@rts.First.Aspect said:
Anyone older than RC = "boomer"Stevo_666 said:
And there is the key point.First.Aspect said:
Is theirs any more sustainable than ours?rick_chasey said:
No real point, just worth looking at how generous or not the UK is to its retired versus other similar countries.wallace_and_gromit said:
I'm probably being dense here, but I still can't pin down your precise point. Can you just spell it out, please? Thanks!rick_chasey said:It's a rather disingenuous list above once you line them all up together:
https://data.oecd.org/pension/net-pension-replacement-rates.htm < UK is below the EU 27 average (Netherlands is a whopping 89%).
It's a tool economists sometimes use to evaluate how generous or not the pension is.
France's isn't, I know that much.
Also is Rick saying that he hates Dutch Boomers even more than UK ones?"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Amongst the spotty strange haired proto-yoofs of today, anyone older than about 25 is a "boomer". It is a catch all pejorative.Stevo_666 said:
As a Gen X'er I'm offended, getting lumped in with all those old f@rts.First.Aspect said:
Anyone older than RC = "boomer"Stevo_666 said:
And there is the key point.First.Aspect said:
Is theirs any more sustainable than ours?rick_chasey said:
No real point, just worth looking at how generous or not the UK is to its retired versus other similar countries.wallace_and_gromit said:
I'm probably being dense here, but I still can't pin down your precise point. Can you just spell it out, please? Thanks!rick_chasey said:It's a rather disingenuous list above once you line them all up together:
https://data.oecd.org/pension/net-pension-replacement-rates.htm < UK is below the EU 27 average (Netherlands is a whopping 89%).
It's a tool economists sometimes use to evaluate how generous or not the pension is.
France's isn't, I know that much.
Also is Rick saying that he hates Dutch Boomers even more than UK ones?
Can't wait for RC to get called that when he first struggles with an app or somesuch.
0 -
I wonder when Rick will be old enough to hate himself?First.Aspect said:
Amongst the spotty strange haired proto-yoofs of today, anyone older than about 25 is a "boomer". It is a catch all pejorative.Stevo_666 said:
As a Gen X'er I'm offended, getting lumped in with all those old f@rts.First.Aspect said:
Anyone older than RC = "boomer"Stevo_666 said:
And there is the key point.First.Aspect said:
Is theirs any more sustainable than ours?rick_chasey said:
No real point, just worth looking at how generous or not the UK is to its retired versus other similar countries.wallace_and_gromit said:
I'm probably being dense here, but I still can't pin down your precise point. Can you just spell it out, please? Thanks!rick_chasey said:It's a rather disingenuous list above once you line them all up together:
https://data.oecd.org/pension/net-pension-replacement-rates.htm < UK is below the EU 27 average (Netherlands is a whopping 89%).
It's a tool economists sometimes use to evaluate how generous or not the pension is.
France's isn't, I know that much.
Also is Rick saying that he hates Dutch Boomers even more than UK ones?
Can't wait for RC to get called that when he first struggles with an app or somesuch.
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
