UK’s aging population

[MrSmith]

How do you arrive at that conclusion? There's 1.8 people for every pensioner (you say), that isn't enough to support them from taxation revenue.

 

So you think we can employ the people we already have, you asked me what they should do, maybe you should tell me what jobs they can do, and how increasing the population will help them get a job.

 

1.8 people working now have to support today’s pensioners and the economically inactive, but clearly they can't which is why the country as so much debt.

[I1L2T3]

Maybe if under-30s had the prospect of cheaper housing and decent employment opportunities then we could counter this. Perhaps couples would settle down earlier and have children earlier. Perhaps more children that they could afford to support themselves. Like people used to.

 

Instead we have the spectacle of young people priced out of housing, 25% youth unemployment, young people deferring marriage and children until their 30s, and reports of many people failing to get on the housing ladder until their late 30s. It's like ripping the foundations out of society. For what?

[MrSmith]

That would certainly help solve some of our problems.

[Defunct]

Maybe if under-30s had the prospect of cheaper housing and decent employment opportunities then we could counter this. Perhaps couples would settle down earlier and have children earlier. Perhaps more children that they could afford to support themselves. Like people used to.

 

Instead we have the spectacle of young people priced out of housing, 25% youth unemployment, young people deferring marriage and children until their 30s, and reports of many people failing to get on the housing ladder until their late 30s. It's like ripping the foundations out of society. For what?

 

I like that post. It is honest and accurate.

Now let me think who started it......... "There is no such thing as society...................":roll:

[I1L2T3]

That would certainly help solve some of our problems.

 

Don't hold your breath about either of the two main parties doing anything

[boyfriday]

1.8 people working now have to support today’s pensioners and the economically inactive, but clearly they can't which is why the country as so much debt.

Which is my whole point, the age distribution of workers is in imbalance and becoming more so. Frankly I don't think the figure now is as bad as you quote, but nonetheless something has to be done to address that imbalance.

[MrSmith]

Which is my whole point, the age distribution of workers is in imbalance and becoming more so. Frankly I don't think the figure now is as bad as you quote, but nonetheless something has to be done to address that imbalance.

 

It’s quite simple to do a little math, take the number of people working and divide by the number of people over 18 not working. You could even take the number of people employed by the private sector and divide by everyone else and the figure will be closer to one person paying tax to support someone else. This is clearly not sustainable and increasing the population will just make matters worse, what we need is more people working and fewer people claiming benefits.

[JFKvsNixon]

It’s quite simple to do a little math, take the number of people working and divide by the number of people over 18 not working. You could even take the number of people employed by the private sector and divide by everyone else and the figure will be closer to one person paying tax to support someone else. This is clearly not sustainable and increasing the population will just make matters worse, what we need is more people working and fewer people claiming benefits.

 

Have you factored in the consideration that a lot of workers do not pay enough tax to support themselves?

[MrSmith]

Have you factored in the consideration that a lot of workers do not pay enough tax to support themselves?

 

Nope, but we already know that the top 10% of tax payers support everyone else in some way or another.

[I1L2T3]

I like that post. It is honest and accurate.

Now let me think who started it......... "There is no such thing as society...................":roll:

 

If you ever get to read the full interview you will see that Tory philosophy has not altered much at all since that time. I read it a while ago and it's one of the most confused pieces I've ever seen. Thatcher repeatedly contradicts herself, fails to see why what is good for individuals to do might not be good for people collectively

 

The interview is like a blueprint for what Cameron is doing and describes many elements of what New Labour went on to do too. What Thatcher said is that each family must look after themselves first. By that she means go to work and not claim benefits. But then she said in the interview something like if going to work doesn't get you a basic standard of living you should claim housing benefits and other top-ups.

 

The rubbish wages topped up by state support was a Tory policy too. But if there is no such thing as a society, and we have just a collection of individuals doing the best for themselves, then who provides the money to pay the top-up benefits for the people who do the right thing and go to work for rubbish wages? The thing is that if you want that top-up support you have to have a concept of society, of people collectively contributing to support others who are doing the right thing. And also willing to support those who are vulnerable or for whatever reason never got the chance to make their own contribution.

 

If there is no concept of society then how will we support our pensioners, including the ones that did the right thing and worked for peanuts and were unable to build their own pensions? It's a massive contradiction.

 

These contradictions drive right to the heart of why Tory policy is so flawed, why the individual is not the be all and end all. It's sad that these themes are still so strong today.