Petem95

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4570151.stm

So graduates can't retire until 70, but low income workers get to retire on a full pension at 65???

Graduates start their working lives later with debts of over 20k, and many will end up never getting a graduate-position job anyway, then will not only have to cope with repaying debts for years, but also work until an older age???

Labour are a complete joke - those who make the effort to work are taxed to death, yet those who dont, get it on a plate

As a result of these policies professional couples cant afford to have kids, yet chav's and immigrants are encouraged to have loads because it means increased benefits - doesnt bode well for the future of Britain does it

Leslie

Another well thought out desperate headline grabbing policy!

Les

logiclee

I would currently advise anyone around school leaving age to consider a Modern Apprenticeship.

All our apprentices are well paid and have free further education with the best candidates going onto Uni for HND and Degree qualifications.

Many other large firms do the same.

Cheers
Lee

New To Scoob

Very true Lee bit I think you've missed the point of the first post.

Totally agree the less you do the more you get under this government

John.

Tim-Grove

Agreed, most apprentices at my company will go on to do HNC/degree courses. It will all be paid for and will be while gaining on job experience and earning a good wage.

Luminous

iTrader: (3)

Well I wondered what their first stealth tax would be. Now we know Get another 5 years of tax out of you, and then drop you on the scrap heap when you are too old to enjoy anything.

Who the h*ll still has good health when they are 70? Especially if they have worked for companies in this current culture.

Dracoro

Raise retirement age to 70 for EVERYONE.

People are living longer, this needs to be paid for. Many people well into their 60's are easily capable of working. They're much healther than people in their 60's were 30 years ago. And even after retiring at 70 they still have many years left to enjoy it.

You have 3/4 ways of paying for the retired (a combination of is usually the done thing)
1) Raise retirement age
2) More immigration (or get everyone to produce 3.4 children rather than 2.4)
3) Higher taxes and or.. 4) Much larger investment of individuals salaries into private pensions

Votewise, it's a lose-lose situation for any government and no solution is 'nice' but it HAS to be addressed.

warrenm2

another point missed here is that assuming that a graduate gets paid more than a manual labourer (I think thats the comparison being used), he will consequently be taxed more (and maybe at a higher rate also) than said labourer, BUT WILL GET THE SAME STATE PENSION (which is ****e anyway, and subject to the whims of politicians). Cant think why I didnt vote Labour, oh, hang on.....

Tim-Grove

Don’t see why a so called affluent university graduate should be reliant on a crappy state pension after a lifetime of high paid jobs. Surely they would have already planed for their retirement, used their higher earnings to invest in something so that they could retire at a reasonable age. It’s not hard, my dad retired two years back at the age of 50 and is now leading a very comfortable life style. It may come a surprise to most but I (non university educated labourer ) for one won’t be relying on meagre hand outs from the government.

pslewis

I think its a GREAT idea!!

Graduates **** about for 5 years of their lives .... seems sensible to add it on to the end of their life!!

Why should someone who starts work at 15 or 16 whilst A levels are being played about with by others and then they play at Uni!!

Nah, sting them I say!!

Well done Labour - excellent policy!!

Pete

Bottomfeeder

People seem to be forgetting the possibility that when those of us in out late twenties/early thirties do retire, (at either 70 or 65) there won't be a state pension (not the way it's being 'dipped into at the moment).

J4CKO

iTrader: (1)

What makes me laugh is that women spent years asking for equal employment terms with men, and then the goverment said "ok then, you can work until 65 as well".

Ladies, didnt see that one coming did you !

warrenm2

Thats true enough, but what is happening is that person is paying twice, once through NI to get a pension that the politician de jour considers hes gonna pay you, and once again into a private fund that you can choose how it is invested and get a better return - better deal all round to just let people make their own arrangements - as happened in the nineteenth century when people where members of friendly societies - all this claptrap about no pensions before the "wonderful welfare state" is rubbish - people were perfectly well catered for through their own endevours.