Organic will NOT feed the world. 697

On Tue, 27 Jun 2006 15:06:02 +0100, The Reid

Best reason I can come up with for GB thinking it's sensible to raid private pension schemes to the extent of 7 BNyear, and to keep on doing it as the schemes are floundering was that he was advised by people who were "asbestos", and FTM later when GB caved in to public sector union demands that the state underwrite public sector workers gold plated pensions, no matter what.

What's your explanation?

Not a logical connection I made.

You sound like my former (Tied) advisor. As the fund keeps on going down, (and GB {= 100 Maxwells} takes his breasthe) "To maintain your pension, you should put more money in."

Duh ! %-( Good money after bad or what?

Rabid I may be, but I'm not an "ite" of any kind I believe that the British public have been singularly badly served by all the politicians we've had since the war.

I disliked Margaret Thatcher because she reminded me of a 25+ yo femail supervisor also called Margaret who looked and sounded the same, who was shagging the 60+ year old mill manager in the mill I worked in as a student in order to retain her position (as it were).

But I do take delight in pointing out to lily livered lefties that "Owd Calligan" presided over the closure of more coal mines and heavy industry in his last 4 years in office than she did in her first 4, by which time it was more or less finished. Which was catastrophic for me because I'd trained to be an engineer.

Correct. However the spin we all kept getting in the mid '70s, "It's run under strict rules by the inland revenue", "guaranteed not to perform worse than the government scheme" USW, USW, USW. lead contributors to private schemes to think that they were "asbestos", after all they were blessed by the government and to prove it. it had tax free status.

As it turns out the pension providers had been doing the equivalent of putting their members pensions on the 2-30 at Kempton Park.

And then in 2,001 the Government turn round and say "It was just a bad investment".

Nice.

Do you still maintain the fact that the civil servants had plant proof pensions had no bearing in how they advised ministers? It would appear that otherwise there is a lot to explain.

If the investment returns that pertained when I took out my scheme (1987) had been maintained the ageing population would have been nary a problem. There were no warnings "Investments can go down as well as up" then you know

DG