Search results

Just like Astute, I can afford to semi-retire at 54. All my career I saved 20% plus into private pensions. Never bought a new car; often skip holidays and run other businesses to supplement my savings. Never wasted money on gadgets. I've never dodged a single tax. What did I do wrong...

What tax concession? You mean the tax concession that everyone has to save for a pension that is capped at £40k? Nobody is told they have to slave away to 68 or 70; they have the option to save themselves. They just cannot pick up a state pension until later - exactly like the people retiring...

And if we need some low skilled workers we can let some in. We don't need people washing cars manually in a supermarket car park next to a machine. The reason cited for low growth projections was productivity after all. One of the major reasons for low UK productivity is the massive...

I don't understand the point here. They are not receiving a state pension at 55. If they saved up enough to retire at 55 why shouldn't they?

Here's another impact of free-movement; one that's been mentioned by politicians but anecdotal from my line of work. I work with a lot of Indian programmers. It's much more efficient having some of them on-shore: I can pop round to their desks when I need to, to train them up and help when...

Sorry, one more thought: and of course increasing the retirement age - something we are doing. Imagine trying to do that in say France, where the unions have so much power.

I agree that presently we have a pensions crisis due to: 1) Longevity 2) The baby boom. This is also of course a root cause of NHS budget increase requirements. It's a temporary issue (regarding baby boomers) but not temporary re longevity. Adding millions of low paid workers from Europe...

And we'll be able to reduce net immigration - especially for low-skilled workers, thus: 1) Reducing the pressure on housing and services - but especially housing. We'll be able to catch up with house building requirements and increase supply so that prices actually reduce to affordable levels...

Nah, he likes hip hop.

I think an educated man, who thinks things through for himself, who is numerate and literate and likes the Comsat Angels. ... and I can prove it.

Never heard of this guy before. He's picking an easy target: Islam, like Christianity, has some horrific passages in their respective holy books (even Paul, in his post-ascention epistles writes some awful tosh). If people were to follow them all they'd pretty quickly end up not only being a...

It's a bubble - I wouldn't touch it with your barge pole. There is a saying in the City that when your taxi driver tells you about an investment it's time to sell. Sell whilst you can is my advice.

I got it wrong. It's inflation and unemployment that caused the rethink on Keynes (stagflation): "By the end of the 1960s... the rate of inflation began to rise sharply, and to register a value well above what had been predicted on the basis of the Phillips Curve. At first the authorities...

OK, a couple of passages from that book I mentioned. It's called "Understanding the UK Economy" by Peter Curwen. This is from the second edition. First a critique on borrowing during hardship and paying back whilst in growth: "In fairness to Keynes, it should be said that his view of the...

Not my understanding on Keynsian economics, from a book I read: " I disagree with pretending to know things that I do not, so I'll confess that my knowledge of Keynsian economics in history is limited to a book I read - it's a neutrally positioned book just explaining the history of the UK...

Still there, just moved: FactCheck – Channel 4 News

That's all correct from my understanding. It's a pity they didn't pick up on the fact that the rate of interest on the debt would also rise; which IMO blows McDonnell's theories out of the water. So the debt rises and the rate rises, reducing the ability to spend without either increasing...

Keynes went out of fashion because of the impact on unemployment. In theory, if the country could afford it, I'd agree with you. But if the cost of realising the benefit exceeds the benefit itself then it's no longer a good thing, surely?

If debt were 40% of GDP and we were adding 1% on top I could agree with you. But it isn't, and I have explained why it's a bad idea now.

To comment on some of the things being said about the budget and by McDonnell: 1) House prices and stamp duty. Removing stamp duty for first time buyers will indeed over time increase house prices. This is why: house prices are all about supply and demand. They are high because demand...