fao bcram.......nae bugger else read unless ur into pensions

[Returnofrros]

Office of national statistics latest report.

Disposable income of retired people between 1977 and 2016 rose by 2.8% on average annually.

Non retirement age 2.1%

Disposable income of retirees rose from £2300 annually in 1977 to £27800 in 2016.

Non retirees £1700 to £17200

And the most staggering stat.....21% of retirees had disposable income over £10k per annum in 1977 after accounting for inflation etc this has now risen to over 96%!!!!

And still adult concessions are available.

Beggars belief.

No wonder the report is headlined baby boomers hit the jackpot.

[Oor Wullie]

Why should they not be worked all there days for them.
deserve all they get.

[jdfc]

Some have worked all their days, others go from bru money the pension money overnight when they hit 65

[BCram]

Office of national statistics latest report.

Disposable income of retired people between 1977 and 2016 rose by 2.8% on average annually.

Non retirement age 2.1%

Disposable income of retirees rose from £2300 annually in 1977 to £27800 in 2016.

Non retirees £1700 to £17200

And the most staggering stat.....21% of retirees had disposable income over £10k per annum in 1977 after accounting for inflation etc this has now risen to over 96%!!!!

And still adult concessions are available.

Beggars belief.

No wonder the report is headlined baby boomers hit the jackpot.

Great stuff Rross. Couple of points. Why do the stats start in 1977. You and I know that indices can vary enormously depending on the start date chosen. i think there are the same income inequalities amongst pensioners as there are in the genreal working population so it's unfair to brand these figures as being proof that all pensioners are living in a lifestyle that the young cannot hope to emulate.

FWIW I think the problem is that the universal element of benefits gets distorted when it comes to the state pension. Rich people who have private pensions worth tens possibly hundreds of thousands of pounds don't need universal benfits like the state pension, free bus passes and reduced prices for access to entertainment etc, but there are relatively few of them and if they were all excluded, the savings would not be enough to boost the income of those who live on their state pension, or reduce the contribution that is made by those to work to pay for the state pension.

Corbyn terrified the other parties with his unaffordable offer to write off student debt and provide stse funded access to tertiary education. It worked and they voted for him. I fear that these figures are trying to show pensioners as being undeservedly affluent and they are trying to create an atmosphere that something needs to be done about it.

I think you are being a bit unfair by appearing to lump all pensioners as being affluent beyong the dreams fo the young and ordinary working people.You know there are major income inequalities in the pensioner class so it's not reasonable to promote the attitude that pensioners are rich and the young are poor because they are paying for pensioners"

[Returnofrros]

Why should they not be worked all there days for them.
deserve all they get.

Deserve all they get from own resource I've no problem with.

Getting subsidies when they don't need it, I certainly have.

[Returnofrros]

Great stuff Rross. Couple of points. Why do the stats start in 1977. You and I know that indices can vary enormously depending on the start date chosen. i think there are the same income inequalities amongst pensioners as there are in the genreal working population so it's unfair to brand these figures as being proof that all pensioners are living in a lifestyle that the young cannot hope to emulate.

FWIW I think the problem is that the universal element of benefits gets distorted when it comes to the state pension. Rich people who have private pensions worth tens possibly hundreds of thousands of pounds don't need universal benfits like the state pension, free bus passes and reduced prices for access to entertainment etc, but there are relatively few of them and if they were all excluded, the savings would not be enough to boost the income of those who live on their state pension, or reduce the contribution that is made by those to work to pay for the state pension.

Corbyn terrified the other parties with his unaffordable offer to write off student debt and provide stse funded access to tertiary education. It worked and they voted for him. I fear that these figures are trying to show pensioners as being undeservedly affluent and they are trying to create an atmosphere that something needs to be done about it.

I think you are being a bit unfair by appearing to lump all pensioners as being affluent beyong the dreams fo the young and ordinary working people.You know there are major income inequalities in the pensioner class so it's not reasonable to promote the attitude that pensioners are rich and the young are poor because they are paying for pensioners"

I'll try and do your post justice by answering all your points.

1977 is when the office of national stats figures are generally recognised to be reliable. If they went further back it wud skew the difference much further in favour of pensioners as pensioner income was ridiculously low up to late eighties early nineties.

Your 2nd point re inequalities among some pensioners is true (ill not demand proof) but the new state pension rules will narrow this gap.

Your 3rd point your wrong the proof I out there I survey after survey.

Your 4th point I half agree with, rich no matter how rich deserve the state pension what they don't deserve is free power, free bus passes and guarnteed inflation busting increase in pensions. Any reduction or spreading of wealth to next generation wud be welcomed imho.

Your 5th point I wud throw in every party tries to make oot pensioners are poor, pensioners do it themselves "em a pensioner ye ken", lucky ****ing you wud be my retort.

I will finish by saying the stats sosent include wealth in Isas and property that pensioners have either it


It will be a cauld day in hell afore anybody can come up with a survey re how badly pensioners have done over the last couple of decades.

Still be at the game with my auld man the morrow, £32 split between Dee and dabs which is fair unfortunately the split between the cost for me and auld man is not.

[jdfc]

Where are the mods ? I thought this was a football forum, should these two no move next door ?
Oh wait a minute.......

[Returnofrros]

Where are the mods ? I thought this was a football forum, should these two no move next door ?
Oh wait a minute.......

They don't like me next door��

Might be because em not L or G or B or a T��

[Deeranged]

em not L or G or B or a T��

Are you sure you're not just in denial?

[Returnofrros]

Are you sure you're not just in denial?

Dinnae think so though I cud be an L as I like j and he can be a bit of a fanny.������

[BCram]

Where are the mods ? I thought this was a football forum, should these two no move next door ?
Oh wait a minute.......

This forum used to be full of topics about independence, politics and general discussions, Joe Covenant and others were well worth reading. I think it is a pity that there are so few posters on this forum. As Rross said in the topic heading this was an off topic thread. I don't encounter many people who have a bit of practical experience of pension provision and his posts often get me wondering how he came to the views he holds.

His general criticism always labels "pensioners" as lucky, rich etc and I keep trying to get him to acknowledge that not all pensioners are lucky and rich. A faint hope but that's the point of discussions. I think there must be a better way to organise pensions and how the elderly are looked after. Without the property owning benefit that many of the current pensioners have, I worry that the younger generation is facing a very very uncertain future when they reach pensionable age. Doing something about the state of affairs now is necessary IMO, but what should we do that will be more than a gesture?

[jdfc]

Some reply BCram, you could have just told me to do one, I was only having a laugh with RROS

[noahrab]

This forum used to be full of topics about independence, politics and general discussions, Joe Covenant and others were well worth reading. I think it is a pity that there are so few posters on this forum. As Rross said in the topic heading this was an off topic thread. I don't encounter many people who have a bit of practical experience of pension provision and his posts often get me wondering how he came to the views he holds.

His general criticism always labels "pensioners" as lucky, rich etc and I keep trying to get him to acknowledge that not all pensioners are lucky and rich. A faint hope but that's the point of discussions. I think there must be a better way to organise pensions and how the elderly are looked after. Without the property owning benefit that many of the current pensioners have, I worry that the younger generation is facing a very very uncertain future when they reach pensionable age. Doing something about the state of affairs now is necessary IMO, but what should we do that will be more than a gesture?

Joe Covenant was/is a sanctimonious pryck.

'it is with deepest regret'...not for me it wasn't :)

[Returnofrros]

Joe Covenant was/is a sanctimonious pryck.

'it is with deepest regret'...not for me it wasn't :)

Lol cuda bet my Las £1 his name wuda brought a post from you.��

What was the purda thing again if that's the right term?

[BCram]

Some reply BCram, you could have just told me to do one, I was only having a laugh with RROS

I thought you might have been serious and I didn't want the topic to descend into a bit of banter, so I gave you a detailed reply. Should have realised that you were pointing out that rros was excluded from next door and teasing him. My bad.

Should have known my reference to Joe would have cheered up Noahrab. The "it is with deepest regret" was a classic line from Joe. He worked for local government and was not supposed to use social media during the run up to an election or referendum, purdah. He just couldn't stop himself but he seems to have given up this forum and the other one. Also miss CC33 " voice of the voiceless" who now posts on the other forum. Called things as he saw them and had a passion for spicy chicken wings- I think?

FWIW I think the other forum made a mistake by banning Rros. He has campaigned for improvements in the way the SE is run and always seems to me to have the treatment of the supporters at the forefront of his thinking. I think that the club does run an eye over both forums and sensible constructive comments are helpful in shaping policy at the club.

I was quite heartened by a thread on the other forum where posters gave their age. The balance on the forum was weighted to the under 45 age group. This was a surprise to me because I thought the club was full of pensioners, who had been supporting the club since the 1961 league winning team.in fact there might be a preponderance of Dee supporters who first took an interest in the club at the same time as United won their league championship in 1983.

Because we never get any facts about the ST sales we can only ever speculate. If the pensioner sector of our support is smaller than everyone thinks then perhaps Rros is wrong in thinking that substantial increases to revenue could be achieved for the club if it cut the subsidy given to pensioners. Perhaps we have a much more vibrant and youthful support and what we need to increase our support is a team that can entertain and WIN. Pricing and playing the age card might be a cul de sac. What we need is a good display in the cup competitions, and an end to the historic criticism that we play tippy tappy football.

[Returnofrros]

I thought you might have been serious and I didn't want the topic to descend into a bit of banter, so I gave you a detailed reply. Should have realised that you were pointing out that rros was excluded from next door and teasing him. My bad.

Should have known my reference to Joe would have cheered up Noahrab. The "it is with deepest regret" was a classic line from Joe. He worked for local government and was not supposed to use social media during the run up to an election or referendum, purdah. He just couldn't stop himself but he seems to have given up this forum and the other one. Also miss CC33 " voice of the voiceless" who now posts on the other forum. Called things as he saw them and had a passion for spicy chicken wings- I think?

FWIW I think the other forum made a mistake by banning Rros. He has campaigned for improvements in the way the SE is run and always seems to me to have the treatment of the supporters at the forefront of his thinking. I think that the club does run an eye over both forums and sensible constructive comments are helpful in shaping policy at the club.

I was quite heartened by a thread on the other forum where posters gave their age. The balance on the forum was weighted to the under 45 age group. This was a surprise to me because I thought the club was full of pensioners, who had been supporting the club since the 1961 league winning team.in fact there might be a preponderance of Dee supporters who first took an interest in the club at the same time as United won their league championship in 1983.

Because we never get any facts about the ST sales we can only ever speculate. If the pensioner sector of our support is smaller than everyone thinks then perhaps Rros is wrong in thinking that substantial increases to revenue could be achieved for the club if it cut the subsidy given to pensioners. Perhaps we have a much more vibrant and youthful support and what we need to increase our support is a team that can entertain and WIN. Pricing and playing the age card might be a cul de sac. What we need is a good display in the cup competitions, and an end to the historic criticism that we play tippy tappy football.

That atmosphere tonight, let the young in��