Pensions
 

A sudden thought. So they are turning round and saying that pensioners need to work until say they are 70.

Now we already know that there are limited jobs, even tho the Mail readers and suchlike are regularly whipped into a froth of spite over the fact that the unemployed live a life of idle luxury at our expense and should be made to work, presumably at digging holes and then filling them in as there actually aren't jobs for them to do, but I digress.

Here is Charlie. Charlie has just turned 65 and in the normal scheme of things, Charlie would take his State pension and hand his job over to Fred, who would stop drawing state money and start earning.

Now tho, Charlie keeps working and Fred draws the dole/social for another 5 years, or am I missing something?

Re: Pensions
 

Hang on a minute, you are using logic and we all know that the UK gov have never ever used that method for working things out.

Rosemary

Re: Pensions
 

Yes, you're missing the fact that we have quite a way to go before we're out of recession.
In a perfect World everyone who wanted to work would be able to do so, even up to 70.
No doubt that will never happen, but the govt.in it's infinite wisdom, will likely do it's best to get as many free riders as possible of the govt/taxpayers handout payrolls, in an effort to ease the nation's burden and make ends meet.

Re: Pensions
 

Let me get this straight? A pensioner who has paid all his life to get this shit state pension is then in your books a freeloader when the take what they are entitled to?

The point I'm making is this. If there are a hundred jobs, and 500 people, so that you have to pay social money, whether pension or whatever to 400, then why are you going to make people who have worked all their lives, work even longer?

Like Rosemary said, apply a bit of logic?

Re: Pensions
 

Not at all.

You misinterpret two seperate statements and I don't say pensioners should be MADE to work until 70.

However it would be nice if they had the choice, as plenty who are fit and well, prefer to do so.
They could then get a wage in addition to their pension or at least some of it.

You should maybe try to understand that WORK is not a dirty four letter word in everyones language.

It may come as something of a shock to you bil, but there are those in this world who actually enjoy work, and get lots of satisfaction from it. :blink:

Re: Pensions
 

Sorry? Where the hell did I say all that?

You have to start reading what people actually write.

I merely commented that it seems madness to make people work past pension age in order to then pay others to do nothing.

If you want to work past the pension age, fine, if you have such job satisfaction that you long to work till you die, fine, that's your right.

You are in a minority tho, that's for sure.

Re: Pensions
 

Watch my lips.
I do NOT say ppl. should be MADE to work beyond 65.
However there are quite a few who would prefer to do so and hate it when they feel they are thrown on the scrapheap at 65, still feeling they have a useful contribution to make, plus satisfaction to be gained from it.

Where do I say anything about ppl.working till they die ?

You seem to forget that the world has moved on a lot since the pension age was fixed at 65.
Back then many were lucky to make it to that age.
Now many are still as fit as a fiddle and would be happy to still be doing something useful, subject of course to job availability..

Re: Pensions
 

You were the one who called pensioners free riders.

Re: Pensions
 

I can see the reaoning behind the increased age, but I dont think the government appreciate what an employer looks for in an employee and why

As an ex employer I have to say (and I'm not proud of it) that when presented with a list of applicants for a job, I would rarely look at those in their late fifties / early 60's. I know that sounds terrible, but in my line of work we needed a certain kind of person who could cope with the daily stress of demanding work.

Thats how I think a lot of employers see it, and regrettably thats why people in that age area are going to struggle to be employed in an ever decreasing job market

Re: Pensions
 

I can't see the reasoning. What's the advantage in denying the pension to Charle until he's 65, and then paying Fred, who otherwise would have taken that job, to sit on his arse for an aditional 5 years.

What's the difference bvetween the two?

Re: Pensions
 

Possibly true, however there are many cases where they could continue doing the same job they are already doing, and possibly doing very well,if they still are fit and well, prefer to work, and know the job inside out,as against a new untrained recruit who could take time and money to learn.

Once again bil, you will see my reference to free riders is a seperate statement and it doesn't need Einstein to work out who it refers to.

Re: Pensions
 

The reasoning in their minds I guess (and dont agree) is to save money as they hope that you will kick the bucket in less "pension" time and therefore cost them less. Its assuming that they stay employed for the full period of course .... what I am saying is that getting a job in the late fifties / early 60's area is much more diffidcult. In fact our local chamber of commerce guy reckoned you could be written off in some areas at the age of 50

Re: Pensions
 

True, but it still seems a great shame in cases where ppl. wish to continue in some sort of employment and feel they still have much to offer.

Possibly we are the lucky ones, but there are many who seem to lose all purpose in life once they think they are on the scrapheap, and instead of a long happy retirement, they quickly just fade away.

Re: Pensions
 

Yeah, so if they paid the pension for that 5 years, aren't they likely to save more than if they paid 5 years unemployment?

Aren't more pensioners likely to die in those 5 years than unemployed people who are younger and healthier on the whole?

The whole point is, if you want to work fine, but where's the financial advantage in making pensioners work (that's MAKING) when there aren't enough jobs to go around anyway?

Re: Pensions
 

Thats very true, I know. I'm not condoning the situation by the way, even though I was part of it. Going off topic, I also knew of others that wouldn't employ women in their 20's, or employ black people.


(And before anyone comments ...... I had 25 staff, of different sex, colour and religion) :lol: