Jump to content

Dawson Park Boy

Gold Members
  • Posts

    3,306
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Dawson Park Boy

  1. Yes, your accumulated entitlement would be paid by SG from Independence Day onwards. Remember, they are getting the tax income from all Scottish taxpayers from Independence Day onwards. Thats my take. Maybe someone more knowledgeable could step in here.
  2. Some fair points. The whole NHS system is in a mess but too big to fix quickly. Id like to know if they’re still going through all the charade about testing and segregating out Covid patients? The pandemic is over. No need to bother anymore. Surely? Time we started looking at how other countries deal with health as outcomes here in the UK are near the worst in the civilised world. This business of putting the NHS up on a pedestal has got to stop. It’s a business and we’re the consumers who are being treated abysmally.
  3. Don’t agree. If people want to spend their money on private education, that’s up to them. They're saving the state paying for them and, in effect, paying twice through fees and their taxes. Cant say I’ve seen or heard of bands of screaming private school kids terrorising the general populace. The best way, if you want to end private education, is to make the state system better so that parents don’t feel the need to cough up.
  4. Okay, let’s give this pension thing a go once again. First of all, I have never worked in the pensions industry or have any special knowledge other than what any normal person can pick up from news reports or the media. So that’s my starting point. Maybe LB might join in as he did appear to have some insight into the topic. 1. When you contribute to NI , your contributions go immediately to paying pensions to those currently retired. In other words, there is NO pot as you have in company pension schemes or indeed in some public sector schemes such as teachers, police, health service, etc. That is the crucial point. 2. Over time you do however build up, through your contributions, an obligation for the state (UK at present) to pay you out when you reach pension age. Over the years there have been things like Graduated Pensions, SERPS etc, which, depending on how much you contribute give you an amount higher than the basic OAP. 3. The amount you get and any annual increase is a political matter and is determined by the government of the day e.g. the triple lock, inflation, etc. and has nothing to do with how much you may have contributed. 4. If Scotland were to vote for independence, your NI contributions and subsequent pension would be determined by your residence on the date of independence. No doubt there will be anomalies but let’s put those aside for now. 5. At that point RUK pensioners will be paid out from RUK contributors and Scottish pensioners from Scottish contributors. Exactly the same for both jurisdictions. 6. The liabilities built up within the UK system by Scottish pensioners will be taken on by the SG at independence date and it will be up to them as to how they deal with their state pension liabilities based on contributions thereafter. Just remember that the SG will be receiving all tax and national insurance receipts from independence date into the future. 7.The political worry for voters is as to whether the SG has the means to honour those liabilities bearing in mind that it’s taxpayer base is older and has fewer high earners than RUK(think London and the South East) 8.Refer to the report just out by the economist John McLaren regarding the Scottish taxpayer base relating to current tax devolution which means SG has to tax higher to produce the same revenue and is heading towards a large black hole. These matters may be of no concern to voters but will obviously come out in the lead up to any referendum Ive tried to lay out my thoughts on the basic principles involved and maybe others in the industry could add their wisdom. We can come back to your specific queries in due course but I’ve done my best to expound how I I think it would work.
  5. Depends on your definition of middle earners.
  6. I have one agenda and that is to see the survival of FFC and, hopefully, it’s progression to higher leagues. Previous boards have messed up big time and the new incumbents started off with a poor hand with a minus position at 1st June 2021 and players contracted who were far below the standard we need. Its now up to the current board to steer us into better times and they have done well in getting a real management team in M and S. However, the big problem is getting us through this season and, hopefully, that’s what the main focus is on. We need cash and lots of it.
  7. And that’s the problem!! Having lots of low earning, low tax paying, benefit receiving people is not going to pay the pensions of an ageing population. We need high earners and lots of them.
  8. just read an interesting article by the Scots economist John McLaren where he points out that fiscal devolution (we pay higher taxes in Scotland) is bringing no benefit. All it is doing is papering over the cracks of lower growth and fewer higher tax payers in Scotland than in RUK. In fact the SG will need to keep upping the tax take in Scotland merely to stand still as it is looking at a massive black hole down the tracks. We would have been better off sticking to the Barrnett formula rather than going for tax devolution according to McLaren. This also has ramifications to an independent Scotland being able to meet pension liabilities(here we go again) as it will need to pay liabilities built up under total UK rules out of an ageing population which has fewer higher paying taxpayers than RUK. According to the writer the SG needs to go for growth which it can do under existing powers rather than focus on social policies. To me this is dynamite but no doubt will be rubbished by SNP fan boys.
  9. They need to be satisfied that the company is a going concern which means they need to be sure funds are in place to cover the losses. Otherwise they will need to qualify the Accounts which has consequences. They will need to examine the management accounts to verify the accuracy of the projected loss.
  10. I certainly wouldn’t invest unless I was sure the whole projected loss was being covered as, if not, it’s just money down the drain. Even 25 at £10k is well short of the loss. Expect the auditors will need to be satisfied that they have the funds in place to meet any shortfall before signing off the Accounts.
  11. A friend sent me a copy of an email which he received.
  12. I see that the Board are looking for more people to join the Patrons Group. £10k a pop to help cover the £400k projected loss.
  13. I come at this completely neutral. Im naturally pro vax as I've had all that have been offered. However, these figures are concerning and I definitely would like to see a proper investigation. Your points are fair.
  14. Absolutely. Was in India a couple of years ago and I got the impression that the substantial Muslim minority are treated as second class citizens. Modi does everything to propagate this stance.
  15. The plan is to get growth back on track and, if that works, a lot of those problems will disappear. A big unknown but, in my mind, at long last a chance to get back to conservatism which I believe in. In addition I hope we get a big announcement about expansion of oil and gas exploration plus a go ahead to fracking. Net zero is a nonsense unless we want to go back to deindustrialised times. If it fails, so be it but, in my mind worth the risk.
  16. Not bizarre at all. So many people on here constantly berate and denigrate this country that I love. If it is so intolerable emigration is surely an option.
  17. Borrowing has been unavoidable because of Covid and the energy crisis. Unprecedented. What we can do is throttle back on the public sector.
  18. The Rolling Stones and other rock groups as I recall. A bit difficult to pull out names from 50 years ago. Its to everyone’s advantage for London, and Edinburgh to a lesser extent, to prosper as those areas produce tax that can be filtered out to the rest of the country. Economic policy always needs to be a balancing act but I think that the main thrust should be towards growth and rewarding the productive sectors and aspirational taxpayers .
  19. A very good debate on this just now on the Daily Politics between Paul Mason and Mark Littlewood. All the points on here argued out vigorously.
  20. But to increase CT from 19 to 25% is a huge disincentive to inward investment. Time will tell and we still haven’t had any announcements yet?
×
×
  • Create New...