Starmer’s chronicles

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce80nl1k0p3o

More prisoners are to be released early as prisons are at 99% capacity. There will finally be more prisons built though, something the government should have done years ago.

[tweetiepooh]

I just turned 60 so get my NHS pension now. I could delay it but wouldn't get anymore so I just let the money come in. If I could have left it in and have it grow a bit in value, like my other final salary pension, I would get more when I need it and wouldn't get money early while I am still earning. It may not give me more money in total but based on the other pension delaying 5 years would mean quite a bit more monthly income.


Maybe it is worth thinking about survival rates. At one time people didn't (generally) live for decades on a pension now they more than likely will do (until HMG push the pension age to 90!)

Originally Posted by tweetiepooh

Maybe it is worth thinking about survival rates. At one time people didn't (generally) live for decades on a pension now they more than likely will do (until HMG push the pension age to 90!)

The treasury is fully aware of this, but the political will isn't there. Labour blew all their political capital on the winter fuel allowance, and that was relatively small compared to cutting the triple lock or raising the retirement age. It's political suicide to do that now.

It's also not that easy, given you need to consider if people will remain in a fit condition to work and if the expanded workforce makes it harder for younger people to find work.

The best thing we can do for now is try to ensure people have other savings, such as the workplace pension scheme the Tories put in, but given the cost of living, that's not great either

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

One thing the government could do is ensure that people who hit retirement age are not forced to retire. That would help a little towards restoring the balance.

It won’t solve the problem of course, but it would certainly help. Some people are willing and capable of carrying on well after retirement age - look at Rupert Murdoch and David Attenborough, for example.

But not everyone is able to do so because their employers like to invest in younger people.

Also, the government should restore 3rd child allowance as incentive to make more babies.

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

Also, the government should restore 3rd child allowance as incentive to make more babies.

Fine but small impact really.

Need to tackle housing and childcare costs. That's a much bigger limitation.

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by Damien

Fine but small impact really.

Need to tackle housing and childcare costs. That's a much bigger limitation.

Understood (particularly the economic value of childcare) - but if the ratio of working age people to retired people is the underlying economic problem, then encouraging more babies is a must - and that's a long term project.

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

Understood (particularly the economic value of childcare) - but if the ratio of working age people to retired people is the underlying economic problem, then encouraging more babies is a must - and that's a long term project.

No it is, but housing is one of the biggest reasons people are having fewer children later.

In the 1970s/1980s, the average age to buy your first home was around 23. Now it's 33-24.

People are less inclined to start families until they're more settled.

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by Damien

No it is, but housing is one of the biggest reasons people are having fewer children later.

In the 1970s/1980s, the average age to buy your first home was around 23. Now it's 33-24.

People are less inclined to start families until they're more settled.

Valid point.

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

Also, the government should restore 3rd child allowance as incentive to make more babies.

Not much use if there isnt any work for them to do, they just become a burden at a much younger age.

---------- Post added at 18:24 ---------- Previous post was at 18:17 ----------

Good news for Starmer ?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvgv99e10kzo

The UK economy grew by 0.7% at the start of this year.

Slightly more than expected.

It's better than expected growth and probably means the budget didn't damage the economy as much as was claimed but it's worth waiting until the next quarter when Trump's tariffs hit.

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by Damien

It's better than expected growth and probably means the budget didn't damage the economy as much as was claimed but it's worth waiting until the next quarter when Trump's tariffs hit.

Or was it late quarter economic activity to beat Trump's tariffs and the kicking in of Reeves' budget? And thus a one-off?

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

Or was it late quarter economic activity to beat Trump's tariffs and the kicking in of Reeves' budget? And thus a one-off?

I think it might to beat Trump's tariffs yeah. I don't think it would be to beat Reeves budget because the main thing would be the cost of employed staff so little advantage is trying to beat it a few months early.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

Also, the government should restore 3rd child allowance as incentive to make more babies.

No need. We have high levels of immigration now, which should more than replenish the deficiency.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

No need. We have high levels of immigration now, which should more than replenish the deficiency.

How much is a high level?

Bad news for Starmer:

Sir Keir Starmer’s popularity has slumped to its lowest level on record with the fall most acute among Labour voters, according to YouGov research that will stoke concerns in Downing Street.

The proportion of Labour voters with a favourable view of the UK prime minister has plunged from 62 per cent to 45 per cent in just one month, the polling company found. It is the first time that Starmer has recorded a net negative approval rating among Labour supporters.

Some Labour MPs fear that Starmer’s shift to the right on several policy issues, in an attempt to neutralise the threat from Reform UK, has alienated many of the party’s natural supporters.

https://www.ft.com/content/659406e7-...0-0adebb5ad838

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

How much is a high level?

You mean you don’t know, Andrew? You’re slipping, mate.