Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    or to those who are expecting a state pension will have to get used to the fact that it just isn't coming and that you should be preparing for that likelyhood.

    It isn't coming because the state has already spent the money. The State is currently "committed" to paying £7.1 trillion in pensions to people who are already retired or who are in the workforce. This is nearly 5 times of the UK's total economic output and the vast, vast majority of it is totally unfunded with no avenue of funding in sight. It's not as if the state pension was particularly generous anyway, and yet you aren't even going to get that.

    We can't even save because of QE every 6 months.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The_Mighty_Bush)
    or to those who are expecting a state pension will have to get used to the fact that it just isn't coming and that you should be preparing for that likelyhood.

    It isn't coming because the state has already spent the money. The State is currently "committed" to paying £7.1 trillion in pensions to people who are already retired or who are in the workforce. This is nearly 5 times of the UK's total economic output and the vast, vast majority of it is totally unfunded with no avenue of funding in sight. It's not as if the state pension was particularly generous anyway, and yet you aren't even going to get that.

    We can't even save because of QE every 6 months.
    Wasn't that said in the 1960s/70s/80s/90s/2000s?

    5x GDP is nothing over the next 80 years (by definition 80x GDP)

    When was their last QE? Certainly not in the last 12 months, let alone six.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Quady)
    Wasn't that said in the 1960s/70s/80s/90s/2000s?
    It's at its worse now. State power continues to grow and debt in society is increasing.

    (Original post by Quady)
    5x GDP is nothing over the next 80 years (by definition 80x GDP)
    80 years is far too long a timeframe. The baby boomer generation is close to retirement. The money isn't there and the government continues to encourage debt in the population, leading them to have live hand to mouth.

    (Original post by Quady)
    When was their last QE? Certainly not in the last 12 months, let alone six.
    QE is going to happen in the Eurozone.

    QE fails according to its own measure of encouraging investment and consumer spending as the artificially low interest rates lead to businesses being risk-averse while also discouraging the middle class from saving (which has a calamitous effect on their ability to acquire Capital). It also hits the poor very hard and reduces disposal income (that isn't debt) which means that consumer cannot increase.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The_Mighty_Bush)
    It's at its worse now. State power continues to grow and debt in society is increasing.


    80 years is far too long a timeframe. The baby boomer generation is close to retirement. The money isn't there and the government continues to encourage debt in the population, leading them to have live hand to mouth.


    QE is going to happen in the Eurozone.

    QE fails according to its own measure of encouraging investment and consumer spending as the artificially low interest rates lead to businesses being risk-averse while also discouraging the middle class from saving (which has a calamitous effect on their ability to acquire Capital). It also hits the poor very hard and reduces disposal income (that isn't debt) which means that consumer cannot increase.
    State power is greater now than in the 1960s and public sector debt is higher now? Really?

    Well you defined the time horizon not me. What time period do you want to look at now, and what will be paid out over that period? Baby boomers live hand to mouth? I thought they were supposed to be the wealthy ones

    I dunno about you, but I keep my savings in sterling.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Quady)
    State power is greater now than in the 1960s and public sector debt is higher now? Really?
    Yes, state power is greater now than in the 60s. You'd be delusional to believe otherwise. Debt of all kinds is higher (not just public sector debt, but personal debt as well).

    (Original post by Quady)
    Well you defined the time horizon not me. What time period do you want to look at now, and what will be paid out over that period? Baby boomers live hand to mouth? I thought they were supposed to be the wealthy ones
    The next 10 years. We can't know how much is promised because they understate the liabilities. I didn't say Baby boomers live hand in mouth. I said those who are affected most by inflation (the working poor, the unemployed, pensioners) live hand to mouth and cannot pay off debts.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Your right that it should be a worry but not quite as bad as you suggest. That £7.1bn needs to be set against the size of GDP in 2065 when people entering the workforce now will retire (roughly) so if we assume GDP is 2-3 times bigger then our shortfall decreases.

    Of course this assumes that liabilities do not continue to grow which hopefully they won't as much with the pension scheme. Indeed this needs to go further (Australia has a surplus with pensions but they put away 12% via a scheme).
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The_Mighty_Bush)
    Yes, state power is greater now than in the 60s. You'd be delusional to believe otherwise. Debt of all kinds is higher (not just public sector debt, but personal debt as well).


    The next 10 years. We can't know how much is promised because they understate the liabilities. I didn't say Baby boomers live hand in mouth. I said those who are affected most by inflation (the working poor, the unemployed, pensioners) live hand to mouth and cannot pay off debts.
    In which ways? We don't have conscription now...
    Have you got a source for that?

    So in 10 years time, if the system collapses, I'd still have 30 years to make new provision? Sounds alright, I'll own my house outright in 10 years so could throw more money at it.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    Your right that it should be a worry but not quite as bad as you suggest. That £7.1bn needs to be set against the size of GDP in 2065 when people entering the workforce now will retire (roughly) so if we assume GDP is 2-3 times bigger then our shortfall decreases.

    Of course this assumes that liabilities do not continue to grow which hopefully they won't as much with the pension scheme. Indeed this needs to go further (Australia has a surplus with pensions but they put away 12% via a scheme).
    The £7.1tn needs to be set against GDP until those who have just entered the workforce die in 2100.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Quady)
    The £7.1tn needs to be set against GDP until those who have just entered the workforce die in 2100.
    Yes indeed.

    Though of course we need to reach a point where those coming into the workforce immediately begin to pay enough privately that there'll be no shortfall.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Quady)
    In which ways? We don't have conscription now...
    Have you got a source for that?

    So in 10 years time, if the system collapses, I'd still have 30 years to make new provision? Sounds alright, I'll own my house outright in 10 years so could throw more money at it.
    What about mass surveillance?

    Some aren't as fortunate as you.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The_Mighty_Bush)
    What about mass surveillance?

    Some aren't as fortunate as you.
    I don't think any of the technologies available in the 1960s are under any more surveillance today than they were then - are they? But corporal punishment is gone.

    No, and some are more so.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Quady)
    I don't think any of the technologies available in the 1960s are under any more surveillance today than they were then - are they? But corporal punishment is gone.
    What? That's a very evasive answer. It doesn't matter if the technologies were available or not.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The_Mighty_Bush)
    What? That's a very evasive answer. It doesn't matter if the technologies were available or not.
    Well it does for two reasons:
    - You can live with as little surveillance now as you did in the 1960s by living today as you would have then
    - You can't demonstrate if we had them then if they'd have have less/more/the same survallience
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Quady)
    Well it does for two reasons:
    - You can live with as little surveillance now as you did in the 1960s by living today as you would have then
    - You can't demonstrate if we had them then if they'd have have less/more/the same survallience
    No you can't that's a lie. CCTV?

    I wasn't arguing that. I was simply arguing that state power has increased which is obviously true.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The_Mighty_Bush)
    No you can't that's a lie. CCTV?

    I wasn't arguing that. I was simply arguing that state power has increased which is obviously true.
    CCTV isn't something that knows who you are, it can't identify you.

    As someone who reported someone as missing in 2005, CCTV, mobile phone records and bank records drew a blank. The franking of two letters they sent gave the best clue of where they were. Thankfully they returned after a couple of weeks.

    Well the state cannot legally kill me or put me in the army, I'd have them top of my list in terms of powers tbh.
 
 
 
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.