Attacks on state pension/old age benefits

[Smokeandsteam]

IDS is and always has been particularly ideological when it comes to the working class and wage labour. He believes that work - a particular form of it that demands aspirational thinking and action - is good for the soul of the prole.

It’s a view that is simultaneously Victorian and deeply neo-liberal with its emphasis on reflexivity and the self.

It was there in his intervention on welfare. It’s here on pensions.

Whilst capital needs to widen the tax base, given the collapse in wages. And while pensions are losing value and avoiding paying people their pensions works for Fund Managers and hedge funds, I can’t see an election footing Johnson making the same mistakes as May did on social care at the last GE.

But, IDS’s floated idea will act as an ideological outrider for the next Tory government. Expect to see this return to the agenda post a Tory election victory.

 

[marty21]

The age profile (not to mention the wealth profile) of Tory voters is such that there's no reason for them to give a shit.

If they just relied on the rich to vote for them , they would never be in power.

 

[Proper Tidy]

IDS is and always has been particularly ideological when it comes to the working class and wage labour. He believes that work - a particular form of it that demands aspirational thinking and action - is good for the soul of the prole.

It’s a view that is simultaneously Victorian and deeply neo-liberal with its emphasis on reflexivity and the self.

It was there in his intervention on welfare. It’s here on pensions.

Whilst capital needs to widen the tax base, given the collapse in wages. And while pensions are losing value and avoiding paying people their pensions works for Fund Managers and hedge funds, I can’t see an election footing Johnson making the same mistakes as May did on social care at the last GE.

But, IDS’s floated idea will act as an ideological outrider for the next Tory government. Expect to see this return to the agenda post a Tory election victory.

State pension is the elephant in the room, it's the largest chunk of social spending ('welfare' although hate using that term, it's a fucking pension) which is 35% of all govt spending. Clear they will attack it at some point - probably two pronged with rise in NIC (which is a regressive tax given falls heaviest on ordinary earners at 12% up to 50k, 2% above 50k).

Although remains case that at 29% of average earnings UK state pension is shittest in developed world and at already announced state of 68 one of (I think probably the) oldest state pension age, never mind fucking 75. If US can fund a better state pension than UK with a lower retirement age then fucks sake

 

[ska invita]

The aulder I get the more I realise not only isn't there a government plan but that most politicians are actually very stupid

Looks absolutely part of the plan to me - hollow out every part of the welfare state that remains

 

[Pickman's model]

Looks absolutely part of the plan to me - hollow out every part of the welfare state that remains

If there was a plan it wouldn't need saying and it wouldn't emerge from such a peculiar location, nor I think would it emerge at such a time as to be a drum regularly beaten in an anticipated election campaign. Saying there's such a plan gives these people far more credit than they deserve.

 

[ska invita]

If there was a plan it wouldn't need saying and it wouldn't emerge from such a peculiar location, nor I think would it emerge at such a time as to be a drum regularly beaten in an anticipated election campaign. Saying there's such a plan gives these people far more credit than they deserve.

genuinely dont follow your line here.
A tory think tank floats the next privatisation/dismantling of the welfare state
The idea exists out there while people get used to it
It then eventually becomes Tory policy

A well trodden process

 

[Pickman's model]

genuinely dont follow your line here.
A tory think tank floats the next privatisation/dismantling of the welfare state
The idea exists out there while people get used to it
It then eventually becomes Tory policy

A well trodden process

You're shifting the goalposts somewhat

 

[ska invita]

I dont follow, but lets leave it there

 

[Pickman's model]

I dont follow, but lets leave it there

i see what you're getting at but i don't agree - see my pm

 

[Raheem]

If they just relied on the rich to vote for them , they would never be in power.

Fair point, but you'll note that I explicitly said not to mention that they were rich.

 

[mwgdrwg]

I am counting down the days till retirement and I would be SEVERELY pissed off to have to add eight years on to that. Must be fought HARD.

I'm sure there will be lot's of internet petitions.

 

[mwgdrwg]

Is this really happening?

If so, when are we going to start smashing things?

 

[Proper Tidy]

Is this really happening?

If so, when are we going to start smashing things?

Well it's just a think tank floating it but it's a think tank that is often an auxiliary of govt

 

[Baronage-Phase]

All public servants here have had compulsory retirement age raised to 70.
Imagine trying to teach 30 kids PE at 70?

 

[Proper Tidy]

All public servants here have had compulsory retirement age raised to 70.
Imagine trying to teach 30 kids PE at 70?

Isn't that just the age they have to retire though rather than age from which they can retire?

Tbh am in favour of compulsory retirement, getting rid of that here under banner of 'but people want to work' was start of grind on state pension, old age benefits, age people can access pensions etc

Edit: although raising compulsory age indicates similar direction of travel

 

[Pickman's model]

Well it's just a think tank floating it but it's a think tank that is often an auxiliary of govt

i haven't followed the route by which notions begin as ideas and end as tory policy. i suspect some things will pursue the course you and ska invita lay out and others will emerge by other paths. but only the most inept and ineffective politicians would adopt a policy like that to further raise the pension age as it surely can have few proponents outside the palace of westminster, and fewer would suggest such a thing so soon before a likely general election. ska may be right that it will be adopted at some point as tory policy - it's entirely the sort of thing which would seem pleasant to them.

but i don't think that the policy aim is simply hollowing out and destroying the system of benefits and pensions, but attacking sections of the working class - the difference seems to me that it's something in which the labour party can join in attacks on sections of the working class more easily than they can or will aid the tories in destroying the system of social security. the difference on the ground, as it were, is that there are still benefits but they're harder and harder to claim. rewinding to the mid-90s, the tories introduced the jsa, but the blair government made it so much harder to claim. both parties join in attacks on people coming here to live off our benefits and scapegoat the poorest in society - even though so many claimants are actually in work.

the further raising of the pension age seems to me to be something more than a simple attack on parts of the working class, though, and nearer the poll tax end of policy options - it no longer takes on the 'feckless poor' or 'workshy' or whatnot, but the entire working class and a large portion of the middle class. i don't think ids has half the cachet he thinks he has, i think that his resignation over uc being so harshly implemented has undermined his position, and so i think this policy proposal won't become tory policy unless people perceived as more capable - people like michael gove - adopt the notion and run with it. i don't believe it will be a slow but seamless transition from a csj publication to tory manifesto and should it make it that far, i think it will be a far trickier thing to install in legislation, as it would offend so many tory voters and agitate so many people who would never vote tory.

but i don't think there is a government plan because the government necessarily changes now and then, because everything is geared to five year plans, the legislated period between elections. there's a short-termism in so much the government, of either party, does, and not a vision which can see ten, fifteen or twenty years into the future. where i work the organisation has a strategy which it is working towards for a vision of where we should be in the 2030s. the government can not have such a plan, while even such piecemeal proposals as further raising the pension age is something which can only become government policy in the near future should we remain part of the european union. parliamentary time will be for many years almost exclusively devoted to our new relationship with the world otherwise!

 

[Proper Tidy]

i haven't followed the route by which notions begin as ideas and end as tory policy. i suspect some things will pursue the course you and ska invita lay out and others will emerge by other paths. but only the most inept and ineffective politicians would adopt a policy like that to further raise the pension age as it surely can have few proponents outside the palace of westminster, and fewer would suggest such a thing so soon before a likely general election. ska may be right that it will be adopted at some point as tory policy - it's entirely the sort of thing which would seem pleasant to them.

but i don't think that the policy aim is simply hollowing out and destroying the system of benefits and pensions, but attacking sections of the working class - the difference seems to me that it's something in which the labour party can join in attacks on sections of the working class more easily than they can or will aid the tories in destroying the system of social security. the difference on the ground, as it were, is that there are still benefits but they're harder and harder to claim. rewinding to the mid-90s, the tories introduced the jsa, but the blair government made it so much harder to claim. both parties join in attacks on people coming here to live off our benefits and scapegoat the poorest in society - even though so many claimants are actually in work.

the further raising of the pension age seems to me to be something more than a simple attack on parts of the working class, though, and nearer the poll tax end of policy options - it no longer takes on the 'feckless poor' or 'workshy' or whatnot, but the entire working class and a large portion of the middle class. i don't think ids has half the cachet he thinks he has, i think that his resignation over uc being so harshly implemented has undermined his position, and so i think this policy proposal won't become tory policy unless people perceived as more capable - people like michael gove - adopt the notion and run with it. i don't believe it will be a slow but seamless transition from a csj publication to tory manifesto and should it make it that far, i think it will be a far trickier thing to install in legislation, as it would offend so many tory voters and agitate so many people who would never vote tory.

but i don't think there is a government plan because the government necessarily changes now and then, because everything is geared to five year plans, the legislated period between elections. there's a short-termism in so much the government, of either party, does, and not a vision which can see ten, fifteen or twenty years into the future. where i work the organisation has a strategy which it is working towards for a vision of where we should be in the 2030s. the government can not have such a plan, while even such piecemeal proposals as further raising the pension age is something which can only become government policy in the near future should we remain part of the european union. parliamentary time will be for many years almost exclusively devoted to our new relationship with the world otherwise!

Yeah I agree with this, it won't be Tory policy by next week or year (it would be fucking suicidal for any party to announce rapid increase to SPA of 75 anyway, they'd be out of office for years). It's indicative of an acceleration of direction of travel though, backed up by hard evidence of national insurance pot a few years from exhaustion, ageing pop etc. Unless any sort of radical break, it could be Tories, labour, libdems etc who implement, or rather a combination of bit by bit across a few terms

 

[oryx]

Isn't that just the age they have to retire though rather than age from which they can retire?

Tbh am in favour of compulsory retirement, getting rid of that here under banner of 'but people want to work' was start of grind on state pension, old age benefits, age people can access pensions etc

Edit: although raising compulsory age indicates similar direction of travel

The concept of working well past retirement age is becoming more and more normalised.

Cue somewhat patronising stories in the mainstream media about 'Harry, 86, loves his job stacking shelves in Tesco'.*

Yes, we should all aspire to be like Harry. Instead of retiring at 65 and being a burden on the state, which we don't want to be, of course, do we?

*Ok, I made that one up but you get my drift hopefully.

 

[Proper Tidy]

The concept of working well past retirement age is becoming more and more normalised.

Cue somewhat patronising stories in the mainstream media about 'Harry, 86, loves his job stacking shelves in Tesco'.*

Yes, we should all aspire to be like Harry. Instead of retiring at 65 and being a burden on the state, which we don't want to be, of course, do we?

*Ok, I made that one up but you get my drift hopefully.

Defo. This is Margaret, who loves being a dinner lady! (and having a roof, food, water, gas etc)

Think it's 1 in 10 pensioners (post 65) already in work, will go higher

 

[eatmorecheese]

Oh fuck this. Dying in harness is the objective. Utter cunts.

 

[Pickman's model]

Oh fuck this. Dying in harness is the objective. Utter cunts.

on the positive side if i die in service at my job i leave 4 x my annual salary, which is considerably more than i would leave if i died after retirement.

 

[Proper Tidy]

on the positive side if i die in service at my job i leave 4 x my annual salary, which is considerably more than i would leave if i died after retirement.

Good point about death in service, if state pension age starts getting up to 70+ you can expect DIS to go, no insurers will want to underwrite employers

 

[sheothebudworths]

Honestly, what sort of cunt even thinks of such a thing, let alone formulating their dark, Tory wank-dream into a fucking plan, on paper?
Let's literally work people into the grave, save on pension pay outs, after a lifetime slogging, with the added bonus of forcing even more younger people into having to claim benefits, that we'll obvs do everything we can to stop them receiving, cos now there's even less work to go around.
How the fuck do you wake up in the morning with that result as your best suggestion to pass on?

 

[Pickman's model]

Honestly, what sort of cunt even thinks of such a thing, let alone formulating their dark, Tory wank-dream into a fucking plan, on paper?
Let's literally work people into the grave, save on pension pay outs, after a lifetime slogging, with the added bonus of forcing even more younger people into having to claim benefits, that we'll obvs do everything we can to stop them receiving, cos now there's even less work to go around.
How the fuck do you wake up in the morning with that result as your best suggestion to pass on?

With a small alteration their plan has some merit, simply work the tory scum to the next world

 

[Argonia]

Somebody at Twitter is arguing that pensions for MPs should be the same as the state pension and should kick in at the same time. I would go further and cut MP salaries to the average national salary and ban secondary forms of income.

 

[treelover]

In other EU countries such a policy, even if only kiteflown, would have a huge response, from organised labour, but also the wider left, even an element of the youth, yet here all you can see is some debates on social media,

what has gone wrong,

 

[Proper Tidy]

In other EU countries such a policy, even if only kiteflown, would have a huge response, from organised labour, but also the wider left, even an element of the youth, yet here all you can see is some debates on social media,

what has gone wrong,

Amen brother

 

[Pickman's model]

Somebody at Twitter is arguing that pensions for MPs should be the same as the state pension and should kick in at the same time. I would go further and cut MP salaries to the average national salary and ban secondary forms of income.

we could save money on wages and indeed pensions by simply guilotining all sitting and former sitting mps on horse guards parade

 

[Pickman's model]

Not to mention all ppc's

 

[Argonia]

Think of the crowds at the guillotines. The popcorn sales alone would be through the roof.