Rumble":3e1714w9 said:
I'd call a public sector attitude one with an air of entitlement totally divorced from reality, not to mention a hugely over-inflated sense of self worth.
If I put 11% of my salary aside each month i'd have to choose between eating and paying the mortgage. That's what it means to not be able to afford something.
I'm 28, and like most of my peers i've never had a pension, can't afford it. Are you telling me, with a straight face, that despite that I should continue to fund above average pensions for a public sector which serves us so poorly? Maybe I could have more services cut so you can live a bit more comfortably in your old age at my expense. Seriously, many me the people in the public sector don't even know you're born!
I'd disagree with a huge chunk of that, and I've worked in the private sector for about 16 years.
Yes, many moons ago, I did work for a government department, and during that time, was a member of a very decent pension scheme.
When I went to work in the private sector, the first company I worked for also had a very decent, final salary, pension scheme. I paid into that - and I've continued to pay into decent pension schemes all the time I've worked in the private sector.
Yes, life would be good to not have to pay out that chunk of money, every month, to fund a pension - but it's a priority that some seem to defer. Now some will talk about affordability - but I've worked alongside people earning roughly the same amounts, who've never paid into pension schemes, and when questioned, they've said things like they can't afford it. Personally, I've never viewed the expense as an option - I've viewed it like tax - and essential deduction from my wages, that should fund my retirement life - or at least would, if the people in charge of it (both public and private sector) hadn't dipped into and squandered big chunks of the funds.
But you see, that's how pension schemes are supposed to work - enforced saving - in a way, just like mortgages - because in general, people can't be trusted to provide and save over long periods - and think of the long view, so regimented, enforced solutions are generally needed.
From where I'm sat, I don't resent the public sector people their pension schemes - they were what was contractual and agreed when they commenced employment. Now pragmatically, when things change, compromise has to be made at some point - but all the same, I suspect private sector staff would fight tooth and nail if / when their decent / final salary pension schemes are assailed.
There's lots of unfounded rhetoric spouted by some about the private sector not approving where the taxes are going to fund public sector pensions - but the politics of envy should not affect this - and I'm sure there's lots of funding choices we could all hugely argue over.
The Hutton report did make a point over this - the pensions aren't unaffordable - they're just unfair to some. The problem is that "unfair" always requires perspective - and when people start examining the income, benefits, and lifestyle of those benefiting from public sector pensions, they get a bit touchy when poignant questions are asked of them.
