thing is the british 18 yr old that is leaving education has british parents that contributed to the system for probably more than 20 years. The said 18 yr old will also contribute for the next 50.
That was exactly where I was coming from on it cooper1203.
That looks like double counting to me.
Either your taxes go repay what you have taken from the system in your youth, or they go to pay the current crop of takers, in this case kids.
In any case the young adults arriving as migrants have cost the UK taxpayer next to nowt.
The kids just leaving school have cost the state lots in health and education.
Young migrants who work and pay taxes are better “value for money”, not a drain on the state.
That is simple logic.
I do stress that I am not saying anything is wrong in us paying for kids’ health and education. In fact I think taxes should be a bit higher and give us all a better NHS and school system.
Importing workers is cheaper than educating our own.
I certainly do not agree with it as a policy, but it is clearly so.
Back peddaling faster than Coco the clown on a unicycle.
So why would you even compare kids who were born here who have 100% right to be here with illegally entered kids who have 0% right to be here.
It is the most stupid way of making an irrelavant point I have ever heard…even from you.
1 Like
Read the post.
hence why or otherwise even though i am 47 there wont be any state pension for me. You old ■■■■■ are living too long
Pensions, or at least the state pension are paid for by those in work at the time, not by ourselves in advance.
If there were more younger people in work, then I could have retired earlier rather than later!
You want a decent state pension in 20 years time?
Get out and make loads of babies, or get more young workers in the system.
ummm is that why your state pention allowance is worked out by how many years you have contributed
“Pensions, or at least the state pension are paid for by those in work at the time, not by ourselves in advance.”
We did pay in advance for our pensions.
After a qualifying period you get the full state pension.
After that period you still pay in, but get no extra pension.
If you are in a well paid job then you get to pay extra NI, but get the same pension as someone who has only paid in a little because they are on low pay.
We did pay in order to get an entitlement.
Those funds were not invested for us to draw on later.
When working your NHS goes out straightaway to those already retired.
Your participation means you qualify to get monies from workers in future years.
It works that way so that when introduced there would not be a thirty year gap before anyone got owt useful.
Whoops I meant NI contribution not NHS.
The state pension scam affects everyone not just women.No private pension provider could get away with re defining it as a discretionary benefit.The terms of which can be arbitrarily changed or even payments with held and withdrawn and stopped.
“Those funds were not invested for us to draw on later”
They were and still are. Without links you get yourself tied in knots,
1 Like
From your link:
“the Chancellor commissioned a Pensions Review in July 2024, requesting the Minister for Pensions to lead Phase 1 (investment). The review aimed to explore the size and shape of the Defined Contribution (DC) pension scheme market and the Local Government Pension Scheme in England and Wales (LGPS) and current trends in relation to the investment approaches taken.”
Not the State Pension which is funded by National Insurance contributions.
From the ONS
“The UK State Pension is unfunded, which means that its obligations are not underpinned by an actual fund or funds. Such schemes are often referred to as “Pay As You Go” (PAYG). The pension payments made by the government for unfunded pensions are financed on an ongoing basis from National Insurance contributions and general taxation.”
https://www.ons.gov.uk/aboutus/transparencyandgovernance/freedomofinformationfoi/statepensionfunds
I did read the post…you attempted to justify your ‘‘irregular’’ immigrants by saying they were a better proposition than an indigenous native 18 yr old.
Because he/she had contributed nothing towards tax.
I said that adult migrants were cheaper, because they had taken nowt from our taxes in education and health care.
I was not comparing migrant kids and UK kids.
I also said nothing about that fact being good nor bad…it is a fact however.
Yes but who actually cares whether it is correct or not…as I said it’s a stupid thing to say.
Cheaper than UK kids…that sounds just like comparing migrant kids to UK kids to me.
Well, one of us is always yelling about how expensive migrants are.
But overall they are “better value for money” than our own kids.
Arguments that they cost society are not supported by facts.
Personally I do care about what is correct, and factual, and true.
Correct, factual and true. Skewed reports tell the person who’s commissioning them exactly what they (and apparently you) want to hear.
The real cost of unfettered migration will probably not affect you seeing as you are neither female nor attractive. If you were you’d undoubtedly have a different opinion. Do indigenous Brits ■■■■, molest and terrify women? Yeah of course they do, but I guarantee that you’ll not find a link despite your best efforts quoting figures of sexual intimidation and offences carried out by Asian immigrants. The reason for this? I’ll leave it for everyone else (not you obvs) to figure out.
I’ll reissue an old challenge that you neatly swerved; go for a 9pm walk through one of the areas inhabited by your beloved people and please please please report back your findings.
“There is no single ‘correct’ estimate of migrants’ fiscal impact. Different studies make different assumptions, and not everyone will agree on what the best assumptions to make are”.
The above taken from your link franglais, go shove your link where the sun don’t shine.
1 Like
wrong again… guess that the biggest cost for an uncomplicated birth is? translation …highest crime rates in areas that have a high immigration rate… most british people work at least for a few years before having children. but the point you are failing to see deliberately is that a british born child’s parents have worked and continue to work and contribute to society. they contribute to society /ecconomy by spending money in the stores immigrants send their money home clocg up the nhs and other services and take housing stock