Don’t trust government with your pension

Just too large a pot of money or them to keep their hands out:

Mr Ralfe has sounded the alarm over reports the Government wants to change the way the £14.7bn Tata pension scheme’s accrual rate is measured, by linking it to the consumer price index instead of the faster rising retail price index (RPI), cutting its liabilities by £2.5bn.


10 thoughts on “Don’t trust government with your pension”

  1. This is a ridiculous concern. Without the government, Tata steel workers would get a much bigger cut in the pension: they basically accepted a promise from a bankrupt company. This is simply a way to balance the concern of existing workers and pensioners.
    Government is not perfect, but arguing that private companies are perfect in the provision of long dated insurance is basically lying…

  2. Arsearro: The state has NO money that it has not stolen under threat of violence, borrowed (to be paid back with money extracted also under threat of violence) or counterfeited. Why should this company’s shortfall be paid for by the taxpayer at all?. Leaving aside the fact that the states green bullshit is a prime cause of the company’s bankruptcy. Along with the combined economic bungling of all the world’s other political shite. Of course the UK poli-scum don’t want the bad publicity that their meddling and incompetence have brought them –that’s why.

    If the political scum are blowing hard about what their doing for these workers then let it be done without the usual dirty tricks. A group of cunts with 35 billion for third world crooks and 80 billion for toy train sets don’t need to be worried about a few bob on some pension fund surely? This is the Age of Osburke after all. Happy days are here again.

  3. So Much For Subtlety

    I am beginning to think that the only safe pension scheme, the only one that will not be ripped off by wide boys, confidence men and outright thieves, is one located in an off-shore tax haven with privacy laws.

    I will now amend my preferred pension option – we should copy Australia’s system where the worker and the employer kicks into some sort of third party fund, but that fund should be located in Liechtenstein or the Cayman Islands.

    That way it will be safe from the wide boys, confidence men and outright thieves who fill Parliament.

  4. It’s a perennial problem.
    1 Organisation makes promise.
    2 decades later it is found that the promise can’t be met.
    3 nobody thinks to blame the people who made the original promise.

  5. Pat: Why should the original promisers be blamed if they promised in good faith.

    It’s not their fault that society has since been all fucked-up by decades of statism in general and socialism in particular.

  6. SMFS,

    Just align your interests with those of the political classes. They’ve all accumulated wealth (or intend to) and have no desire to see their pockets picked by a future government.

    Forget trying to copy Warren Buffet’s investment strategy; instead, copy Tony Blair’s.

  7. The original promisers should be considered for blame because they were mistaken. Might have been in good faith, might not.
    If a person makes promises that he himself won’t have to keep- exercise due diligence.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *