• Welcome to the ShrimperZone forums.
    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which only gives you limited access.

    Existing Users:.
    Please log-in using your existing username and password. If you have any problems, please see below.

    New Users:
    Join our free community now and gain access to post topics, communicate privately with other members, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and free. Click here to join.

    Fans from other clubs
    We welcome and appreciate supporters from other clubs who wish to engage in sensible discussion. Please feel free to join as above but understand that this is a moderated site and those who cannot play nicely will be quickly removed.

    Assistance Required
    For help with the registration process or accessing your account, please send a note using the Contact us link in the footer, please include your account name. We can then provide you with a new password and verification to get you on the site.

Strikes take 2

Can anyone clarify if Jeremy Clarkson is technically a public sector worker as he is paid by the BBC?

Bit of a tongue in cheek comment on the One Show tonight. :winking:
 
I hate George Osbourne and would like to kick him in the face. At least if you invited Cameron round for dinner he'd use his fake charm, feign interest and generally behave himself.

If osbourne was at your dinner table it would only be a matter of seconds before he was sneering at the quality of your silverware.
 
Interesting question, why did far fewer public sector workers go on strike in 2006/2007 about pension reforms/cuts? IIRC it was only NUT for teachers and even then hardly any of them did, certainly there were not many school closures unlike today.
 
TBH Kay phrases like that do not exactly help, its a withdrawal of labour about pay and principles, not a day "opting out" of work because you can afford to
It was never intended that way Gary, and I certainly can't. As I said in the earlier post, I felt solidarity was important and I regret that Tony finds that hypocritical. I'd prefer him to think my original comments on this thread were ill conceived and ill informed.
 
Of course it is an estimate, I said all along it was. The ONS study is also an estimate, but a pretty good one. The link sets out the methodology and explains its weakness. How else do you propose to model the issue?

http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171776_233736.pdf discusses the methodology and its limits as an estimate.

see p8 onwards of this for another estimate: http://www.ifs.org.uk/budgets/gb2011/11chap7.pdf there is a good section on the regional disparities (and illustrative of the problem created by national pay bargaining)



What do you want? The Trust Deed and Rules? I linked to the BBC article because it clearly states the funding position for a range of sectors. In post #300 you said that teachers' pensions are not funded out of general taxation, but the BBC link directly contradicts that. As usual you've taken the position that anyone contradicting you must be wrong and so dismissed it. You still haven't demonstrated that there is a relevant trust that manages the liabilities on an actuarial basis.



I've given a broad overview of the decline of DB schemes in the private sector, as well as the increased risk of the ultimate provision. The Hutton Report goes into detail about the trends in private sector plans. For example, in 1997, 30% of private sector employees were in a DB scheme. By 2009 that had fallen to 11%. About 67% of private sector employees have no pension of any kind, compared to 16% of public sector employees.

The growth of DC schemes is simply without comparison to DB schemes. Most will offer employer contributions up to a low level (typically up to 5%), in addition to employee contributions. The employee also bears the investment risk as I have stated previously and billions were wiped off DC pension funds in 2008. This directly impacts employees in such schemes by reducing their future benefits. Those in DB schemes i.e. the public sector were entirely insulated from those losses by the taxpayer.

Personally I think it is obvious that public sector pensions are much more generous than the private sector. Even with the changes proposed I still think they are generous. Are you going to say this is all vague and worthless or are you going to offer your own opinion of the fairness of public sector pensions?

In bold are the points everyone can be aware of , the reports you used your opinions and what you saying are broad , estimates . Which is what I have been saying all along . You data is lovely im sure , its your opinion , based on question you raised . You cant give any more as their all speculative theories for modelling a point only you think is of interest

For me my points have been the comparison of wages and the actualoy figures (Hutton report ) and if pensions are valid (which the Westminster reports have shown the teachers ones are ) and this is not a generalised issue but needs to be a specific detailed working and acknowledgement they are all different .

People in private sector don;t have pensions , oh dear what a shame hmm now when they joined who's responsible for that ? It's also not relevant to the viability or long term solvancey of the public pensions and the goverments decision to reform them under one banner (even if they are current fine )

The benefit of taking the low paid public sector job was the perk of a better pension , if you work in a private sector job and you haven't looked at what is available or made your own prevision guess what that's your fault .

IF we take away "public" "private" it wil read , person finds one job with good pension low wage person finds other job high wage . Makes choices . However again generalised to really add or find a solution .

And this is my point , the working life time of a coastguard and IT network engineer and a dustman are not equatable , what they do is different each day , when they need to slow day or change their working methods is utterly different, as are their fiscal needs and demands .
 
Osy, its a new day. Give up and start on something else. Youve been going round in cirlces on this one for a long time now.
Why not start a new subject?
 
Nonsense. Neil F has given us facts, Osy has given us opinion based on his view on the world and Big Brother. Neil won that one.

With your signature quotation I'm not sure that your independent adjudication on this matter is entirely beyond reproach :)
 
Nonsense. Neil F has given us facts, Osy has given us opinion based on his view on the world and Big Brother. Neil won that one.

My argument was opinion based Nap's . Neils fact's were not salient to the point . Data can be produced for anything . However if its speculative and estimates its just guesses no matter how well presented .

Points I did reference were mainly to Lord ( :P ) Huttons report about his investigation into actually specific wages and pensions , not statistic's to formulate a model on a future projection.
 
My argument was opinion based Nap's . Neils fact's were not salient to the point . Data can be produced for anything . However if its speculative and estimates its just guesses no matter how well presented .

Points I did reference were mainly to Lord ( :P ) Huttons report about his investigation into actually specific wages and pensions , not statistic's to formulate a model on a future projection.

Anthony Hutton's a lord now? When can we expect to see Dame Kate Lawler?
 
probably about time to close this thread...though Barnablue did say he'd give us his thoughts on tax incidence and the yield of a financial transaction tax...
 
probably about time to close this thread...though Barnablue did say he'd give us his thoughts on tax incidence and the yield of a financial transaction tax...

Or he could just post a link from the Grauniad
 
Back
Top