Under 35? No pension for you.

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/pensions/article-2787888/how-state-pension-funded-cash-runs.html

…Cash reserves in the National Insurance Fund have plunged in the past few years and could come up short as soon as next year, forcing the Government to dip into money coming in from general taxation, according to the research.

Baby Boomers need their nudist sex cruises.

The Centre for Policy Studies report warns under-45 they face tax hikes and a later retirement age, and under-35s they can expect the state pension to be scrapped altogether….

Even better, give them a pitying look and smirk no matter what they say.
Oh no who could have foretold such a disaster…
I know exactly what I'm doing, says the INTJ

From the wonderfully titled “The End Should be Nigh“;

Timing aside, with the Fund gone, there would be no justification for HMRC to continue to collect the insurance premium that is NICs.

There is a little good news. A little.

Allow me to draw your attention, dear Reader, to Section 5.4 Fund Exhaustion

…Fund exhaustion, whenever it arises, would be of considerable symbolic significance. It would confirm that even with all the recent cost saving measures (such as sending the SPA into rapid retreat) the forthcoming single-tier State Pension is unsustainable. Either benefits are further watered-down, or Generation Y, [20] in particular, will face rising taxes. This is unreasonable; Generation Y is already faced with unaffordable housing, college debts to repay, fragmented careers and earnings stagnation, and far thinner occupational pensions (DC, not DB, bar the public sector) than their baby boomer parents.[21] It is perhaps no surprise then that the 25-34 years old age group (i.e. core Generation Y) are the least likely to live in households in the top total wealth band. Conversely, only 4% of individuals aged 55-64 years (i.e. baby boomers), and 4% aged 65 or older, live in households in the lowest total wealth band.

[20] = Under-35s.

It gets better.

..In extremis, perhaps we should gradually put an end Corporation Tax altogether, replacing it with consumer taxes?…

crying laughter lmao

Let’s see The Guardian Media Group and its readers evade those, with their lifestyle of conspicuous consumption.
In short, fuck Baby Boomers.  I cannot stress this enough.
If you’re new and think that’s too far or unfair, see Best Post. In short, I refuse to work my arse off until I drop dead so they can spend half their extended lifespan fucking around and spreading STDs on every continent.

They can’t pull the wool over our eyes for much longer.

They’ll starve anyway, idiots failed to not abort have enough children, expecting they could sponge off other people’s – creating a ‘tragedy of the commons’ because everyone had the same ‘bright’ idea and children ARE the original pension plan, after all. They work for you when you cannot. We’ll vote to drop their “entitlements” when we realise en masse how they screwed us on every conceivable front.

The Green Party’s wealth tax won’t work

Lefties can crunch numbers, I am shocked.

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/01/why-green-partys-wealth-tax-policy-wont-work

..In fact, it would be a miracle if the tax raised more than a fraction of even our recalculated amount. No serious economist would suggest that a tax could be so efficient, or so void of dynamic effects, that it would collect all that such a simple application of arithmetic would imply. And case studies from Europe make grim reading for Green party politicians eager to spend other people’s wealth. …

Sit back and enjoy watching as they cling to fictions while reality crashes down around their ears.

Sit back and enjoy watching as they cling to fictions while reality crashes down around their ears.

Redistributive socialism (rich progressive taxation) has failed

http://conservativewoman.co.uk/readers-comment-day-redistributive-socialism-proved-failure/

Wasn’t it Wilfred Pickles who described redistributive socialism in this way? – You collect in everyone’s money and divide it out equally. Then, when the reckless and the feckless have spent theirs, you collect it all in again and divide what’s left out equally. Then, when the reckless and feckless have again spent theirs, you do the same, over and over again.

Socialist ideology is based on the premise that everyone has equal talent and intelligence and that everyone is responsible and honest. As already said in the article, this has been proved to be unrealistic, time and time again. For a current day example, look at the present condition of Venezuela.

Demographic lessons for Europe from Will Durant, Gibbon re the Romans

“If we had, each of us, upheld the rights and authority of the husband in our own households, we should not today have this trouble with our women. As things are now, our liberty of action, which has been annulled by female despotism at home, is crushed and trampled on here in the Forum … Call to mind all the regulations respecting women by which our ancestors curbed their license and made them obedient to their husbands; and yet with all those restrictions you can scarcely hold them in. 1f now you permit them to remove these restraints . . . and to put themselves on an equality with their husbands, do you imagine that you will be able to bear them? From the moment that they become your equals they will be your masters” (Will Durant, Caesar And Christ, P. 89) source

Which ideology does that sound like?

Will Durant saw the decline of a civilization as a culmination of strife between religion and secular intellectualism, thus toppling the precarious institutions of convention and morality. This is happening everyday as rule of law is being undermined by those that have lost touch with our god-given morality for secular philosophy. To quote Durant:

“Hence a certain tension between religion and society marks the higher stages of every civilization. Religion begins by offering magical aid to harassed and bewildered men; it culminates by giving to a people that unity of morals and belief which seems so favorable to statesmanship and art; it ends by fighting suicidally in the lost cause of the past.

For as knowledge grows or alters continually, it clashes with mythology and theology, which change with geological leisureliness. Priestly control of arts and letters is then felt as a galling shackle or hateful barrier, and intellectual history takes on the character of a “conflict between science and religion.”

Institutions which were at first in the hands of the clergy, like law and punishment, education and morals, marriage and divorce, tend to escape from ecclesiastical control, and become secular, perhaps profane. The intellectual classes abandon the ancient theology and-after some hesitation-the moral code allied with it; literature and philosophy become anticlerical. The movement of liberation rises to an exuberant worship of reason, and falls to a paralyzing disillusionment with every dogma and every idea.

Hello, Atheism Plus.

Conduct, deprived of its religious supports, deteriorates into Epicurean chaos [DS: hedonism]; and life itself, shorn of consoling faith, becomes a burden alike to conscious poverty and to weary wealth. In the end a society and its religion tend to fall together, like body and soul, in a harmonious death. Meanwhile among the oppressed another myth arises, gives new form to human hope, new courage to human effort, and after centuries of chaos builds another civilization.source

Finally, this entire article;

Had every Roman father been teaching his sons righteousness instead of war, and every mother making a home for her children; had all parents assembled their children in their homes instead of the circuses and public baths; had they taught them chastity and honor and integrity and cleanness; would Rome still be a world power? Certainly it was not the barbarians from the north but the insidious moral termites within that destroyed the Roman world empire….

The story of the civilizations of the world is a continued story of the same weaknesses that leave a country helpless and disintegrated.

In our own time on both sides of the Atlantic and the Pacific and in the north and the south, we seem to be following the same trends. Our successes bring us to extravagances, to our seeking for high amusement. We control childbirth and reduce our families. We divorce and break up our homes. Many of our children become orphans in one way or another. We become irreligious and practice evil ways. We indulge in the bestial satisfactions. We crave social activities at the expense of our family life and … we lose our sense of rightness, of goodness, of devotion.

It is easy to see the resemblance between our modern-day situation and that of ancient Rome. According to Will Durant [an eminent writer and student of civilization], “Prostitution flourished. Homosexualism was stimulated by contact with Greece and Asia; many rich men paid a talent ($3,600) for a male favorite; Cato complained that a pretty boy cost more than a farm. But women did not yield the field to these Greek and Syrian invaders. They took eagerly to all those supports of beauty that wealth now put within their reach. Cosmetics became a necessity, and caustic soap imported from Gaul tinged graying hair into auburn locks.

Women won the free administration of their dowries, divorced their husbands or occasionally poisoned them, and doubted the wisdom of bearing children in an age of urban congestion and imperialistic wars. Already by 160 Cato and Polybius had noted a decline of population and the inability of the state to raise such armies as had risen to meet Hannibal. The new generation, having inherited world mastery, had not time or inclination to defend it; that readiness for war which had characterized the Roman landowner disappeared now that ownership was being concentrated in a few families and a proletariat without stake in the country filled the slums of Rome. Men became brave by proxy; they crowded the amphitheater to see bloody games and hired gladiators to fight before them at their banquets.” (Will Durrant, The Story of Civilization, Caesar and Christ, pp. 89–90)

My brothers and sisters, I beg of you to study history—the history of the world. Look at Babylon in Assyria. Look at Jerusalem. Read about Sodom and Gomorrah. The story of Rome and its dissoluteness is in every library. Other cities likewise slipped from high plateaus to low marshes and defilement.

Rome gained the world and lost its soul. As Durant says, “Every new conquest made Rome richer, more rotten, more merciless. She had won every war but the class war. … Now through a hundred bitter years of revolution, Rome would pay the penalty of gaining the world.” (Durant, p. 108.)

His epilogue summarizes: “A great civilization is not conquered from without until it has destroyed itself within. The essential causes of Rome’s decline lay in her people, her morals, her class struggle, her failing trade, her bureaucratic despotism, her stifling taxes, her consuming wars.” (Durant, p. 665.)

We have been concerned with the rapid rise of a public notion that families should be reduced. A congressman whom we know proposed a program of limiting the family to two children. Again, study the history of countries that have done this. It seems that imported laborers, slaves, uneducated criminals often take the place of the children who would have been under supervision and training.

Will Durant queries:

What had caused this fall in population? Above all, family limitation. Practiced first by the educated classes, it had not seeped down to a proletariat named for its fertility; by a.d. 100 it had reached the agricultural classes. … Though branded as a crime, infanticide flourished as poverty grew. Sexual excesses may have reduced human fertility; the avoidance or deferment of marriage had a like effect, and the making of eunuchs increased as Oriental customs flowed in to the West. …

“The rapidly breeding Germans could not understand the classic culture, did not accept it, did not transmit it; the rapidly breeding Orientals were mostly of a mind to destroy that culture; the Romans, possessing it, sacrificed it to the comforts of sterility. Rome was conquered not by barbarian invasion from without, but by barbarian multiplication within.

I could make a joke about British mass immigration but it already is one.

“Moral decay contributed to the dissolution. … Men had now, in the middle and upper classes, the means to yield to temptation, and only expediency to restrain them. Urban congestion multiplied contacts and frustrated surveillance; immigration brought together a hundred cultures whose differences rubbed themselves out into indifference. Moral and esthetic standards were lowered by the magnetism of the mass; and sex ran riot in freedom while political liberty decayed.” (Durant, pp. 666–67.)

The real tragedy is the large number of innocent children who live with only one parent after a divorce or family breakup. In a city not far away from Salt Lake City, 38 percent of all the children under 18 are short of parents. Only one parent is their best record. When children drop to a one-parent basis, that is the announcement of the failing civilization, and it means social disorganization. One survey stated that 70 percent of male prisoners in the United States came from broken homes where they lived with only one parent. (“Home: the Place to Save Society,” Ensign, January 1975, 3)

Ezra Taft Benson (Quorum of the Twelve)

As a free people, we are following very closely in many respects the pattern which led to the downfall of the great Roman Empire. A group of well-known historians has summarized those conditions leading to the downfall of Rome in these words:

“… Rome had known a pioneer beginning not unlike our own pioneer heritage, and then entered into two centuries of greatness, reaching its pinnacle in the second of those centuries, going into the decline and collapse in the third. Yet, the sins of decay were becoming apparent in the latter years of that second century.

19th Century – Industrial Revolution.
20th Century – Computer and Electronic Revolution.
21st Century – ???

“It is written that there were vast increases in the number of the idle rich, and the idle poor. The latter (the idle poor) were put on a permanent dole, a welfare system not unlike our own. As this system became permanent, the recipients of public largesse (welfare) increased in number. They organized into a political block with sizable power. They were not hesitant about making their demands known. [£$£$£$£$£$] Nor was the government hesitant about agreeing to their demands … and with ever-increasing frequency. Would-be emperors catered to them. The great, solid middle class—Rome’s strength then as ours is today—was taxed more and more to support a bureaucracy that kept growing larger, and even more powerful. Surtaxes were imposed upon incomes to meet emergencies. The government engaged in deficit spending. The denarius, a silver coin similar to our half dollar, began to lose its silvery hue. It took on a copper color as the government reduced the silver content.

“Even then, Gresham’s law was at work, because the real silver coin soon disappeared. It went into hiding.

“Military service was an obligation highly honored by the Romans. Indeed, a foreigner could win Roman citizenship simply by volunteering for service in the legions of Rome. But, with increasing affluence and opulence, the young men of Rome began avoiding this service, finding excuses to remain in the soft and sordid life of the city. They took to using cosmetics and wearing feminine-like hairdo’s and garments, until it became difficult, the historians tell us, to tell the sexes apart.

cracking up dawn french

“Among the teachers and scholars was a group called the Cynics whose number let their hair and beards grow, and who wore slovenly clothes, and professed indifference to worldly goods as they heaped scorn on what they called ‘middle class values.’

Hipsters.

The morals declined. It became unsafe to walk in the countryside or the city streets. Rioting was commonplace and sometimes whole sections of towns and cities were burned.

Like a London Riot?

And, all the time, the twin diseases of confiscatory taxation and creeping inflation were waiting to deliver the death blow.

“Then finally, all these forces overcame the energy and ambition of the middle class.

“Rome fell.

“We are now approaching the end of our second century.” (Address by Governor Ronald Reagan of California at Eisenhower College, New York, 1969.)

In 1787 Edward Gibbon completed his noble work The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. Here is the way he accounted for the fall:

1. The undermining of the dignity and sanctity of the home, which is the basis of human society.

2. Higher and higher taxes and the spending of public monies for free bread and circuses for the populace.

3. The mad craze for pleasure, sports becoming every year more and more exciting and brutal.

4. The building of gigantic armaments when the real enemy was within the decadence of the people.

5. The decay of religion—faith fading into mere form, losing touch with life, and becoming impotent to warn and guide the people.

Is there a parallel for us in America today? Could the same reasons that destroyed Rome destroy America and possibly other countries of the free world?

For eight years in Washington I had this prayerful statement on my desk: “O God, give us men with a mandate higher than the ballot box.”

The lessons of history, many of them very sobering, ought to be turned to during this hour of our great achievements, because during the hour of our success is our greatest danger. Even during the hour of our great prosperity, a nation may sow the seeds of its own destruction. History reveals that rarely is a great civilization conquered from without unless it has weakened or destroyed itself within.

The lessons of history stand as guideposts to help us safely chart the course for the future. (“Watchmen, Warn the Wicked,” Ensign, July 1973, 38)

Capital flight from London begins

to New York.

Why?

Low taxes.

“An article in this week’s New York Magazine suggested that one of the reasons for the shift from London to New York was the more favourable tax regime on the western side of the pond, with those buying into new builds receiving tax breaks while in the UK, penalties have been imposed on foreign “non-doms” in recent years. “

No state control and complaints.

“Manhattan’s real estate market has become the latest destination for wealthy foreigners keen to park their wealth, a safe haven in an uncertain world where no one asks questions and discretion is assured.”

Fear of collapse.

“In many cases, buyers from places such as Russia, China or Argentina, where even the super-wealthy fear the whims of an undemocratic government [wealth stealing] or uncertain currency, have been snapping up apartments with such hunger that they often don’t bother going for a viewing, making the purchase via a phone call with a specialist broker, let alone live in their new property.”

The London market is oversaturated.

“However, according to the Knight Frank Global Cities Survey, New York last year moved into second place behind London as the most important city in the world to the super-wealthy, ahead of Geneva, Dubai and Paris.

Knight Frank predicted that the Big Apple would go on to overtake London within a decade.”

Supply and demand hits the champagne socialists.

“These type of properties, which tend to be cheap compared to their equivalents in Hong Kong, and especially London, were until recently just about affordable to native New Yorkers on a decent salary, who are now find themselves priced out.”

“Brazilians, Argentines and other South and Central Americans are also attracted to New York, being closer than London and with a far more stable economy and currency than their own.”

Disagree there. London is more stable.

“That means the demand for property in both London and its New York rival from foreign buyers with a spare million or ten to spare isn’t going to slow any time soon.”

Property doesn’t go anywhere. Feudal investment strategy.

Foreign Affairs admits tax limits to precious equality measures

“The simple fact is that large wealth taxes do not mesh well with the norms and practices required by a successful and prosperous capitalist democracy. It is hard to find well-functioning societies based on anything other than strong legal, political, and institutional respect and support for their most successful citizens. Therein lies the most fundamental problem with Piketty’s policy proposals: the best parts of his book argue that, left unchecked, capital and capitalists inevitably accrue too much power — and yet Piketty seems to believe that governments and politicians are somehow exempt from the same dynamic.” ~ a book review