SIGN UP

What A Ruddy Hypocite

Avatar Image
youngmafbog | 12:42 Thu 12th Oct 2017 | News
23 Answers
Any how does anyone's pension pot get to that size courtesy of the tax payer.

No wonder our essential services are struggling for cash with people like this man with snouts and trotters in the trough.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4970738/Mandarin-oversaw-pension-age-rise-retires-61.html#comments

Answers

1 to 20 of 23rss feed

1 2 Next Last

Avatar Image
The Hypocrisy is that while he has decided that everyone else should wait until the age of 68 before being entitled to a pension he is taking his aged 61.
14:09 Thu 12th Oct 2017
Not everyone riding the free money gravy train dresses in a tracksuit and trainers when reporting for their cash.
His pension should be withheld until he is 68.As the OP says "what a ruddy hypocrite".Disgusting.
This means the 60-year-old will get £85,000 a year and a lump sum of £245,000 when he leaves his job.

Top man....top job.
£85,000 oer annum gross.....approx £55,000 net per year pension.........that's not a lot.


what's hypocritical? He's right, pensions do have to be sorted out (as you'd probably agree). When they were first introduced they were expected to be paid for five years or so until the recipient died. Now it's 20 years plus as life expectancy rises. I think the age needed to be raised. People are still free to take early retirement: I did and now he has.

As to the size of his pension, though, I don't know. How does a 61-year-old come to have more than anyone else on Whitehall? But that's a separate issue from the age at which he chooses to retire.
38 years' service in big jobs, hmmm.
perhaps HE paid a lot into his pension too
The Hypocrisy is that while he has decided that everyone else should wait until the age of 68 before being entitled to a pension he is taking his aged 61.
dannyk, that's his workplace pension. He'll get his state pension at the same age as anyone else.
youngmafbog, he will get his State Pension at the same time as everyone else of his age and not before. It is his Private Pension he is taking shortly which he is entitled to do. So what Danny has said is incorrect and yet you've given him BA. From Puzzled of Hove.
Even as a workplace pension he'd be put in a position not to be unduly affected by the withholding of the State pension for years. A case of, "I'm all right, Jack". The size of his workplace pension is obscene not to mention the initial handout. How does he get such a deal, no one could earn it ?

As I've posted many times previously, raising the pension entitlement age doesn't help anything. There are always only so many job positions at any particular time. If you force those who have done their bit already to continue to stay employed in the hope of saving pension cost then you merely ensure younger folk don't find employment and so raise welfare costs. You abuse both groups for no noticable gain. The sorting out that needs to be done is to lower the retirement age and to move money from the welfare budget to the pension budget to cover the growing costs of pensions and the lower cost of fewer unemployed younger citizens. Or move pensions onto the welfare budget and be done with it.

He would have been in the scheme since it was a final salary scheme and he will have been putting in extra voluntary contributions. That is how it got to be the size it is.
jesus sqad how much is your pension ?
"£85k is not a lot"
yes it is to us proles - and your tax calc is wrong -
11k tax free - next say 38k at 20% (8k)
and the remainder 36 at 40% (16k)
24k tax from 85 k is..... £61k

5000 smackerooze for your wife to get thro ea month

The only thing tax payers ... the rest of us would be taxed on our pension pot at 55% for anything about £1m and that would ( if HE is liable which he may not be) take it down to £1.3m - which I think would take him down to £65k gross

HE is a mandarin - and the mandarins trade union is called 'The First Division Association' ( they consider themselves in the first division. well they are for pensions hur hur hur) - and as we can see they are anyway very vey lucky.

how lucky WE were to be governed by him !


// Private Pension he is taking shortly which he is entitled to do.//

I wouldnt call his civil service pension private
we as employer would have made quite a decent employers contribution to that one - 10-12% of his wage I would have thought ( he would have congtributed another 10% ( of gross wage)

with the whack he was getting
he may well have had a second or third pension ( no employers cont for that one)

Puzzled of Hastings should not be Slightly Clearer of Hastings
// perhaps HE paid a lot into his pension too//

well we certainly did ! ( as employers' cont)
a £1.8 million pot is high but it's not unusual for company pension pots to be approaching £1 now for people who've been in a scheme for 40 years. I don't know how long he has been in. Public sector pensions are of course looking very generous now as they have survived while final or average salary type pensions are no longer available to most in the private sector, and certainly public schemes are still generous where tey allow retiremnet on full pension at 60. But you caan't blame him for joining the scheme when it was on offer
I think the linking of the story to state pension age appears ironic but of course he will also be affected by the state pension changes so will have to wait longer for his state pension (I'm sure he'll scrape by in the meantime)
I don't understand why people are going on about hypocricy here- we may be unhappy with the generous private pensions for some senior civil servants but trying to link this to state pension is wrong. Nothing to do with state pension
TruePP, but on the other hand a large part of this may be from paid AVCs. We don't know do we?
> " As I've posted many times previously, raising the pension entitlement age doesn't help anything. There are always only so many job positions at any particular time. If you force those who have done their bit already to continue to stay employed in the hope of saving pension cost then you merely ensure younger folk don't find employment and so raise welfare costs."

As I've responded many times before, OG, the labour market simply does not work in the way you describe - the so-called lump theory of labour is far too simplistic and is regarded by economists as a fallacy
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lump_of_labour_fallacy
One reason overlooked for increasing the state pension age is that it encourages people to think more about how they fund retirement. If it leads to more people making more provison of their own then we may find people are better off in retiremeent and those who have made their own provision can still afford to retire early can afford to do so without having to wait for a state pension at 67 as their only source of income.
Sorry if we've digressed from the main point but this is what happens when people use a thread about what seem to be overgenerous private pensions to bring in a separate issue of state pension ages
Lol, you've made it look as if you forgot to log out as FF and in as PP.
Of course, no-one could create PP and manage to stay 'in character' when needed.

1 to 20 of 23rss feed

1 2 Next Last

Do you know the answer?

What A Ruddy Hypocite

Answer Question >>

Related Questions

Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.