The Staggers

The New Statesman’s rolling politics blog

RSS

The myth of "unaffordable" public sector pensions

Forcing workers to pay more is a political choice, not an economic necessity.

By George Eaton Published 30 November 2011 10:37

Special Offer: Get 12 issues of New Statesman magazine for just £12

Tags: Public Sector Pensions Strikes Trade Unions

More from George Eaton

View the discussion thread.

57 comments

Wed, 2011-11-30 14:30 — David (not verified)

The false dichotomy set up by the government in order to set private sector workers against those in the public sector is ludicrous and people ought to see through it. They've been doing this since they got into office, asking "Why should poor people pay for other people's children to go to university?", "Why should taxpayers pay for public sector pensions?" These attempts to divide public opinion are incredibly stupid. No surprise really, since the cabinet don't seem to have a functional brain cell between them. What is surprising, however, is the number of people who seem to have fallen for it. Remember, we have a Tory government which is only interested in destroying all but the life available to the wealthy. These choices are made for reasons of politics, not necessity. The rest of us should not be made to pay for the crimes of the banks.

Wed, 2011-11-30 14:35 — Ian5

Neither Public or private sector pensions should be any part of GDP, problem is pension pots have been raided,misused and misappropriated since the concept was born. The entire burden should be meet from pension company reserves of monies already invested... Basic NI should have been ring fenced, but it wasn't.

Pensions contributions should be sufficient to meet personal future needs, but they have been squandered.

Then we have ridiculous predictions... and crimminal fees for poor performing pension companies, banks can't touch my savings only get their bite of intrest earned, the pension pot should be sacrosanct, no growth , no fees.

Sun, 2011-12-04 08:43 — Vorian (not verified)

Council worker: "The money is better in the private sector" - this is untrue. According to the ONS, public sector pay per hour is nearly 8% higher.

"GET OUT OF THE PENSION SCHEME NOW" - thoroughly bizarre. You plainly don't grasp the impact of unfunded public service pensions. Seriously, if this is the quality of thinking among workers in councils...bring on the mass sackings. We're better off lighter.

Thu, 2011-12-01 20:06 — Tabman (not verified)

Les - public secotr pensions were never invested separately; they went straight into the Treasury and straight out again. Labour took the Liberal idea of Retirement Funds and used them to pay out immediately to people who'd never paid in in 1948, and its been ever this. NI was never NI; it was tax.

Wed, 2011-11-30 15:11 — 697mkzgmxhgh

@makwade, NO ITS NOT OK, if you in your greedy selfishness, ARE LIVING IN A PROPERTY WHERE YOU PAY 40% OF YOUR INCOME IN RENT/MORTGAGE,

Then YOU are de-facto foolish BECAUSE YOU CANNOT AFFORD TO LIVE WHERE YOU DO, GET A BETTER JOB, IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR, should be no problem for a sharp-guy like you.

let me give you some LIVABLE FIGURES

IF YOU ARE PAYING MORE THAN 25%/30% OF YOUR TAKE HOME PAY,

ON RENT/MORTGAGE, get this NUMPTY, you cannot afford to LIVE-THERE,

lIVABLE FIGURES, ALL ACROSS THE ENGLISH SPEAKING WORLD, AMERICA/CANADA ARE

for unfurnished-rental/property, 25% of TAKE HOME PAY,

for 'furnished-property'' 33%/35% OF TAKE HOME PAY, is the maximum.

IF YOU ARE IN A PROPERTY YOU CANNOT AFFORD ''''THAT IS YOUR PROBLEM'''

suck it up, or sell-up and go to where you can afford.

DON'T EXPECT THE REST OF THE COUNTRY TO FINANCE YOUR GREEDYNESS

Thu, 2011-12-01 14:42 — JacquesOuze

The discussion here only goes to underline one of George's central points - that the government wants to distract attention from its lack of action on improving private sector pensions. After all, the goal of reducing the cost of public sector pensions will be solved by privatising the delivery of public services. In a few years time, there just won't be that many public sector workers.

Wed, 2011-11-30 15:29 — 697mkzgmxhgh

in a censored recent posting,

I pointed out that the civil-service-unions were just as greedy in wartime as they are now, and gave the details