Fund family planning to cut carbon

Latest Articles

Fund family planning to cut carbon
Page Previous 1, 2, 3

Downsizer Forum Index -> Conservation and Environment

Author

Message

Treacodactyl
Downsizer Moderator

Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 25795
Location: Jumping on the bandwagon of opportunism

Posted: Fri Dec 04, 09 4:14 pm Post subject:

bagpuss wrote:

Treacodactyl wrote:

Obvious Troll wrote:

No its a highly visible benefit to make sure our population demographic, rather than our population doesn't end up in such a state that there aren't enough young people to look after the old people. Yes over population is a problem, but so would be having a very unbalanced population in terms of gender/age. Its not a climate change policy.

Which could, at least in part, be sorted by getting people to save realistically for their retirement and raising the retirement age.

Even if everyone continues to be healthy and capable of work into their seventies there will still be jobs that need the young particularly very active jobs like construction, the police force/fire fighters etc so an demographically unbalanced population would still cause us problems unless of course we increase immigration

No one's saying stop all births. There will still be plenty of people to do those sorts of jobs, especially as the economy has changed dramatically over the years to a service based economy.

OP

Joined: 28 Jul 2006
Posts: 4661
Location: Yorkshire

Posted: Fri Dec 04, 09 5:06 pm Post subject:

Treacodactyl wrote:

Which could, at least in part, be sorted by getting people to save realistically for their retirement and raising the retirement age.

There are quite a few disincentives to saving for retirement in the UK. Final salary pension schemes are being closed down at a considerable rate. There are a number of high-profile financial scandals where a combination of dodgy financial scams and dodgy regulation have eroded trust in our financial services. The banking crisis has highlighted the fragility of our savings institutions. There is also a recognition that if you save today your future state benefits will be means-tested. I was given all these examples by a surveyor working for the Statistics Office conducting research into savings trends within the UK.

Obvious Troll

Joined: 02 Jul 2009
Posts: 36

Posted: Fri Dec 04, 09 5:31 pm Post subject:

Treacodactyl wrote:

Which could, at least in part, be sorted by getting people to save realistically for their retirement and raising the retirement age.

You can have as healthy a pension as you need. If there isn't physically a person to be your doctor, your carer, grow your food it doesn't matter.

As for pension incentives I can only think of 2.
Employers occupational pension contributions are an exempt benefit.
There is tax relief on private pensions but it extends the basic rate band of tax which doesn't help you if you're not a higher rate tax payer. The limits for contributing to your pension before you have to pay more tax on it are the higher of £3,600 or your earnings up to £235,000 per annum.
There's also a lifetime limit of £1,600,000 after which you pay more tax when drawing your pension.

Treacodactyl
Downsizer Moderator

Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 25795
Location: Jumping on the bandwagon of opportunism

Posted: Fri Dec 04, 09 5:49 pm Post subject:

Obvious Troll wrote:

Treacodactyl wrote:

Which could, at least in part, be sorted by getting people to save realistically for their retirement and raising the retirement age.

You can have as healthy a pension as you need. If there isn't physically a person to be your doctor, your carer, grow your food it doesn't matter.

Which doesn't seem to be a serious problem unless you're suggesting most of the jobs in the UK can only be done by very fit and healthy people.

Treacodactyl
Downsizer Moderator

Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 25795
Location: Jumping on the bandwagon of opportunism

Posted: Fri Dec 04, 09 5:51 pm Post subject:

orangepippin wrote:

Treacodactyl wrote:

Which could, at least in part, be sorted by getting people to save realistically for their retirement and raising the retirement age.

Indeed, but it wouldn't be too difficult to sort something out. It would mean people would have to seriously think about saving say 20% of their income rather than spend, spend, spend!

jamanda
Downsizer Moderator

Joined: 22 Oct 2006
Posts: 35056
Location: Devon

Posted: Fri Dec 04, 09 7:55 pm Post subject:
I think saving 20% of your income might be very difficult to sort out for many people.

Treacodactyl
Downsizer Moderator

Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 25795
Location: Jumping on the bandwagon of opportunism

Posted: Fri Dec 04, 09 8:31 pm Post subject:
Easier and better than the alternatives.

Behemoth

Joined: 01 Dec 2004
Posts: 19023
Location: Leeds

Posted: Fri Dec 04, 09 8:43 pm Post subject:
20% of not a lot doesn't add up to much in the end. 20% for an over media income might be affordable and worth the effort for the return.

jamanda
Downsizer Moderator

Joined: 22 Oct 2006
Posts: 35056
Location: Devon

Posted: Fri Dec 04, 09 8:47 pm Post subject:
Indeed, 20% of £100 a week would leave you even broker now and wouldn't go far when you get there.

Treacodactyl
Downsizer Moderator

Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 25795
Location: Jumping on the bandwagon of opportunism

Posted: Fri Dec 04, 09 8:52 pm Post subject:
Wanting an increasing population is hardly moving to a sustainable future unless I've misunderstood something. Just seems selfish.

wipka84

Joined: 07 Feb 2009
Posts: 221
Location: Essex, UK

Posted: Fri Dec 04, 09 10:19 pm Post subject:

Style it so that over a certain amount of children your benifits/contribution is not increased for every other sprog over that number.

Or have a pot, which if you have a child your entitled to a proportion. The amount in the pot is limited, set to a certain amount, more children, less money, same cost to the government (except your still putting pressures on education costs, medical and food).

End free contraception for men and female, fcol if your thinking about it, you can pay the pound or face up the consequences.

Reinvest that saving into improving education about sex and the third world.

Easy :S

bagpuss

Joined: 09 Dec 2004
Posts: 10507
Location: cambridge

Posted: Fri Dec 04, 09 10:30 pm Post subject:

wipka84 wrote:

Ending free contraception wouldn't help reduce rates but instead increase them. I suspect there would be a lot of women who couldn't justify the money for birth control pills if they weren't free

beean

Joined: 04 Jun 2009
Posts: 254

Posted: Thu Dec 10, 09 2:01 pm Post subject:

There are already, statistically, a frightening number of children in the UK growing up below "the poverty line" - growing up in dire circumstances.
If we cut the benefit for the third or fourth child, then surely it just makes the current situation for those children worse? It's only a quirk or luck that means that child A has comfortably-off parents and child B has skint parents: it is not the kids fault after all.
Ok in the long term these impovrished kids may gave a better future as a result - due to a better environment /reduced climate change - but I'm not convinced that they should suffer any more than they do already.
No comment on the fecklessness or otherwise of the parents, I am only talking of the kids.

shadiya

Joined: 02 Feb 2008
Posts: 1285

Posted: Sun Dec 27, 09 2:16 pm Post subject:
I myself am still chuckling over the idea of the government taking climate change seriously....

sue ievers

Joined: 29 Oct 2004
Posts: 24
Location: powys

Posted: Wed Feb 03, 10 11:48 pm Post subject:

Wouldn't we all like less people in the world. It would mean more space, less traffic and less polution. The oil, coal and atomic energy would last longer.
Now ask your self who [url]needs[/url] more than 2 children. This is a different question to who wants more than 2 children.

If I ruled the world then everyone would have the right to have .75 children. A couple could then have 1 child, sell their other .5 right or buy another .5 right. Once the world population had returned to 2 billion then each person could then have the right to have 1 child.

simple

	Downsizer Forum Index -> Conservation and Environment	All times are GMT Page Previous 1, 2, 3
Page 3 of 3

View Latest Posts