No, we didn’t

First, we spent £54.8 billion subsidising pensions in 2016/17.

We did not tax people by £54.8 billion. Not the same thing at all. The government didn’t tax my shit this morning, doesn’t mean it subsidised my easement.

10 comments on “No, we didn’t

  1. Presumably by similar logic the fat lummock would accept this principle should extend to abolition of unfunded public sector pension schemes and payments, like under the NHS?

  2. He is quite wrong, yes; but there’s a nugget of truth in there. That is, that the goose of pension savings could be plucked a little more without much hissing.

    Either plucked on the way in (rather unfair on the younger generation, but politically feasible because they vote less) or plucked on the way out, e.g. by levying National Insurance on pension income (unlikely, because of the grey vote). Or plucked at the higher end, by reducing the lifetime and/or annual allowances.

    I really shouldn’t give them ideas though.

  3. Andrew M,

    NI on the way out really is a tricky one to argue and not just because of the grey vote. Unlike income tax it can be argued that NI was paid on the way in, it also means they’ll have to start charging NI to the over 65s (or whatever the retirement age is at the moment). That goes against the aim of trying to get people to work longer.

  4. Unless NI is merged with income tax on the basis it is, essentially, an income tax thus removing the fiction that NI has any relation to insurance.

  5. Is this the same as the point I make to my aged father when he complains about low interest on his savings by saying it’s a subsidy to me as a mortgage-payer?

    I’ve never understood that argument.

  6. Back in the days of 15% interest, the boot was well on the other foot. How about a regime where interest rates are not either negligible or onerous? That would truly be corajus

  7. He hates pensioners and think we should spend all our money on the young which I presume includes the young private potatoes. Vile man who deserves a good kicking

  8. It’s outrageous that Ritchie’s bovine blogging efforts are subsidised by the government.

  9. “Unless NI is merged with income tax on the basis it is, essentially, an income tax”: but it isn’t an income tax, “essentially” or otherwise. Just list the characteristics of an income tax then list the characteristics of NI. The lists are different in non-trivial ways. QED.

    “Thus removing the fiction that NI has any relation to insurance”: a somewhat fictional fiction, surely?

  10. Ritchie doesn’t care about the anger this would generate, because it’s his idea and his ideas ae great yeah. But others who’ve stepped along the “look at the subsidies”path soon realise that pensions comprise the vast bulk of those, er, ‘subsidies’. And thus it isn’t those evil.multinationals ripping usnoff; it’s pension fund members, pee Corbyn and his gang are telling are really hat working and deserve to see OTHER people pay more tax. And, realising this, they quickly shut the fuck up.
    Not Richard Murphy though. He carries on, abusing anyone who questions him. And them he wonders why nobody wants to give him a job.

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.