Ian Duncan Smith Says Wealthy should not claim pensions

[Mecky]

Same old people, same old pathetic trolling

[I1L2T3]

What trash,you dont know other people situations,you dont know how many kids someone's got,or if someone gives to charities or funds private care for an elderly relative.you just call em an idiot for not having enough money:rant:

you don't know how much someone's house has cost in interest rates.

I keep repeating myself,on 50k you pay 40% tax,the outcome of someone earning 50k and 30k are not that much different,apart from one has payed twice as much in taxes.

So why should that person be denied a similar state pension at the end of it.

Where's the incentive:huh:

 

It's not trash at all. The reality is that the vast majority of people on 50k should be able to save for their future. If they make idiotic spending decisions during their working years it's their own fault.

 

I'm worried about your understanding of the tax system. On 50k earnings you don't pay 40% on the whole amount.

 

You pay nothing on the first 9k

Up to 41k-ish you pay 20%

On everything between 41k and 50k you pay 40%

 

Maybe you need a better accountant.

[Mecky]

It's not trash at all. The reality is that the vast majority of people on 50k should be able to save for their future. If they make idiotic spending decisions during their working years it's their own fault.

I'm worried about your understanding of the tax system. On 50k earnings you don't pay 40% on the whole amount.

 

You pay nothing on the first 9k

Up to 41k-ish you pay 20%

On everything between 41k and 50k you pay 40%

 

Maybe you need a better accountant.

 

What, like buying a house?

[Hillpig]

As I started this discussion is it too much to ask for a bit of civility? I can understand that people may get heated but surely the sarcastic, point scoring and downright cruel is inappropriate and gets the discussion nowhere.

[boyfriday]

Means testing state pension will also encourage some people to stop saving for their retirement.

Hear what you say MrSmith, but do you honestly believe someone on £60k+pa is going to neglect effective pension planning because they might miss out on 100 quid a week in state pension?

If I didn’t need my pension I would just give it to my kids or grandkids.

 

Future generations are going to need every penny they can get their hands on if the babyboomers don't get to grips with the effects of the ageing population and the underfunding historically of long term pensions.

[MrSmith]

me too,get rid of it quick before it gets noticed,otherwise some fat sponging scrubber with 7 kids to 7 different people will get the benefits of my hard earned working life,while I have nothing to show other than experience:suspect:

 

With next to zero interest on bank saving, this is when the mattress comes in handy.

 

---------- Post added 28-04-2013 at 11:23 ----------

 

Why would somebody earn £50k a year and spend it all before retirement so they can subsist on a meagre state benefit, perhaps for 30 years or more, when they retired? I guess I can think of a few answers:

 

1. They're idiots

2. They have no financial planning skills

3. Money runs through their fingers like water. Why put a few bob aside for the future when you can have a new hot tub today.

 

The reality is that anybody with a decent income and anything between their ears will be saving something for their future.

 

They will be investing it in things they can sell as and when they need the money, that way they don't have to declare it as savings.

[boyfriday]

I run my own small business,I wont get a 50k a year pension when I retire,I dont know anyone who will either:loopy::loopy:

 

Do you never visit the dentist, your local GP or your children's secondary school headteacher?

[MrSmith]

The thing is even when people think they aren't relying on the state they always are.

 

If they have legal issues the state will provide a framework for resolution

 

If they need to be rescued from a car crash the state will pay for it

 

If they need emergency care the state will pay for it, as it will for most routine care

 

If they want their kids to be educated the state will pay for it

 

If they want to drive their car on a road the state will pay for a road

 

If they live in a village in the back end of nowhere the state will help facilitate the provision of utilities

 

If they want to fly on a plane the state pays to keep the airspace safe

 

 

The list is practically endless. Everybody relies on the state.

 

The state doesn't pay for those things, the tax payers pay and the more tax you pay the more you pay towards those things.

[I1L2T3]

i agree.

 

 

 

Because that's the way the system works.

 

 

 

And that's sad. the system is far from perfect.

 

 

 

Not at all!- Do you understand what a straw man is ? - Or is this just a phrase you use to try to make your posts look less stupid?

 

I was denied child benefit ( or family allowance, or whatever it was called back then) on a technicality.

 

I was really upset - Not because we were going to starve if I didn't get it, but because some little CA [look up Clerical Service Ranks] who probably didn't know her arse from her elbow had decided I was 'unworthy'.

 

I

 

You claimed you had rarely claimed benefits, never used the NHS. Created a daft argument that you should be able to claim back your contributions. Then practically knocked it down yourself by claiming that you should be entitled to a few bob, when if you are eligible to claim it you actually can.

 

As for not using the NHS are you seriously saying you lived here for 34 years with a family and non of you visited a GP, visited A&E, ever went in a hospital, had a vaccination, none of your kids were ever seen by a school nurse, none of you ever went to a dentist or ever had your eyes or hearing tested. You will also understand that if you had ever needed it, like if you set yourself on fire or something, that the NHS was ready to care for you. After the fire brigade put you out of course.

[boyfriday]

Fair comment,but why then should the wealthy pay 40-50% of there hard earned wages in taxes when not getting a fair deal at the end of their working lives:loopy:

 

Hopefully someone who's paid 40%-50% tax throughout their lives will be getting a fair deal, they're usually in occupational pension schemes and have quite a bounty to look forward to.

 

Personally I wouldn't place any restrictions on eligibility to state pension for someone who'd paid higher rate tax and hadn't made provision for themselves, they should get it like those on lower incomes should.