Another stolen boat on Facebook

[john.k]

I imagine every cop car has plate,car and facial recognition on automatic nick all the time,and the fine for an unlicensed/uninsured car is a wholelot more than a years rego.....(notice on the latest renewal you can pay monthly now......costs about double the annual rate.)......anyhoo....those who get nicked and dont pay end up with SPER....State Penalty Enforcement and Recovery .

[MtB]

45 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:

*I'm lucky enough to have one - couldn't afford the boat otherwise. After 25 years in the CS it's a bit over four grand a year. 

 

I had a customer many years ago who was retiring from the civil service aged something ridiculously young like 55, having joined straight from skool.

 

He was proudly boasting to anyone who would listen that he expected to be drawing his solid gold inflation protected civil service pension for at least as many years as he spent behind a desk in a guvverment office.

[Heartland]

Storm Troopers on the towpath is perhaps a rare sight but at the Comicom Shows they are very common

 

As to the real world

I imagine every cop car has plate,car and facial recognition on automatic nick all the time,and the fine for an unlicensed/uninsured car is a wholelot more than a years rego.....(notice on the latest renewal you can pay monthly now......costs about double the annual rate.)......anyhoo....those who get nicked and dont pay end up with SPER....State Penalty Enforcement and Recovery .

 

I did hear recently that sometimes the equipment is turned off in some places. In view of the paper work resulting from multiple hits. How true this is remains to be proved.

[mrsmelly]

2 hours ago, MtB said:

 

I had a customer many years ago who was retiring from the civil service aged something ridiculously young like 55, having joined straight from skool.

 

He was proudly boasting to anyone who would listen that he expected to be drawing his solid gold inflation protected civil service pension for at least as many years as he spent behind a desk in a guvverment office.

I " retired " iod basis,  from the police aged 34 and have been receiving a pension ever since. Many more years so far than I was in the job. However, the pension is all part of the job, and its a bloody crap job.

[Tony Brooks]

23 minutes ago, mrsmelly said:

I " retired " iod basis,  from the police aged 34 and have been receiving a pension ever since. Many more years so far than I was in the job. However, the pension is all part of the job, and its a bloody crap job.

 

Absolutely and if those with green eyes are looking at your and other public service pensions they need to ask themselves why they did not take up a public service job. They also need to remember many senior manager used enhanced pensions, and thus the pension funds, to avoid paying massive redundancy payments and being taken to court.

[ditchcrawler]

I'm another living on a Pension after spending 20 years on a platform in the north sea, I did come home for good behaviour. I think I have been retired for 20 years now.

[Sea Dog]

19 hours ago, MtB said:

 

I had a customer many years ago who was retiring from the civil service aged something ridiculously young like 55, having joined straight from skool.

 

He was proudly boasting to anyone who would listen that he expected to be drawing his solid gold inflation protected civil service pension for at least as many years as he spent behind a desk in a guvverment office.

I wonder if he made it?

The civil service probably takes less of a toll, but when the Royal Navy had something approaching that CS pension, it seemed only a few of the sailors who'd gone the whole 9 yards before retiring lived long and prospered. One might say they didn't actually get a bigger total pension than many folk - they just got it faster.

Whether because a warship was a tin box full of fag smoke, the rum, or other lifestyle factors I don't know, but it's possibly no coincidence that when the pensioners started lasting longer, the attractive pension steadily went the way of the 'blue liner' cigarettes and the grog! 

Edited April 13, 2022 by Sea Dog
Missing words.

[David Mack]

When I started work the standard employers pension scheme paid a pension of 2/3 final salary, partially index linked. I joined the pension scheme at age 25 with a scheme retirement age of 65. For my generation, life expectancy is around the mid 80s, meaning I could expect to live in retirement for around 20 years. So if the investment gains match inflation, then in order to fund a pension of 2/3 final salary for 20 years, the contributions made by myself and my employer (including the tax relief thereon) would have to be 1/3 of final salary paid over 40 years. How many people contribute anything like that much? Real investment gains help, but it is easy to see why generous pensions can be unaffordable.

[Nightwatch]

2 hours ago, Sea Dog said:

I wonder if he made it?

The civil service probably takes less of a toll, but when the Royal Navy had something approaching that CS pension, it seemed only a few of the sailors who'd gone the whole 9 yards before retiring lived long and prospered. One might say they didn't actually get a bigger total pension than many folk - they just got it faster.

Whether because a warship was a tin box full of fag smoke, the rum, or other lifestyle factors I don't know, but it's possibly no coincidence that when the pensioners started lasting longer, the attractive pension steadily went the way of the 'blue liner' cigarettes and the grog! 

I had some years before ‘signed on’ for the duration. Then Sir John Nott decided that the Armed Forces were too large so came up with redundancy schemes. This, (me having just completed my turn at sea and with two young lads) persuaded me to accept the deal on offer. From day one, I received a pension, that I still receive today and that coupled with State pension, (coz I’m an old git)helps to live a happy life (until me boat batteries give up that is.) My better half is also an old git(ess) gets state pension and has a reasonable NHS pension. We are more financially comfortable now than we have ever been. No dependants just two Jack Russell’s and each other.

[Tracy D'arth]

28 minutes ago, Nightwatch said:

I had some years before ‘signed on’ for the duration. Then Sir John Nott decided that the Armed Forces were too large so came up with redundancy schemes. This, (me having just completed my turn at sea and with two young lads) persuaded me to accept the deal on offer. From day one, I received a pension, that I still receive today and that coupled with State pension, (coz I’m an old git)helps to live a happy life (until me boat batteries give up that is.) My better half is also an old git(ess) gets state pension and has a reasonable NHS pension. We are more financially comfortable now than we have ever been. No dependants just two Jack Russell’s and each other.

I think that most retirees who had the sense to arrange pensions are quite comfortably set up now.

It seems to only be the "live for today and sod the rest" people who are struggling.

But then we never had mobile phones, 54" TVs, Sky, Netflix and all the other "vital" bills to pay.

[Tony Brooks]

22 minutes ago, Tracy D'arth said:

I think that most retirees who had the sense to arrange pensions are quite comfortably set up now.

It seems to only be the "live for today and sod the rest" people who are struggling.

But then we never had mobile phones, 54" TVs, Sky, Netflix and all the other "vital" bills to pay.

 

And I suspect many of those comfortably set up retirees still don't. We were brought up when times were harder, lived through times of high inflation coupled with wage restraint and basically know what is valuable and what is not. I think we are also far less likely to be influenced by advertising and social media.

[Stilllearning]

12 minutes ago, Tony Brooks said:

 

And I suspect many of those comfortably set up retirees still don't. We were brought up when times were harder, lived through times of high inflation coupled with wage restraint and basically know what is valuable and what is not. I think we are also far less likely to be influenced by advertising and social media.

We turn the sound off during ad breaks on the Telly.

[Higgs]

25 minutes ago, Stilllearning said:

We turn the sound off during ad breaks on the Telly.

 

Note: Best time to bang two saucepan lids together, outside window. 

 

 

[Ronaldo47]

It should be remembered (but seldom is) that, when the civil service pension schene was intoduced in the late 1940's, the salararies of civil servxnts was reduced acriss the board by a few percent to fund it. In the days before computers, when wages were calculated manually by clerks, this made sense. Unlike most private sector schemes,;where pension was calculated on sixtieths of years of service (allowing a pension if two-thirds finsl sxlary to be built up by 40 years service) , the civil service scheme was based on eightieths, meaning 40 years of service would only get you  a pension of half your final salary. It was even worse than that, because the private sector final salary was based on the gross salary before pension contributions were deducted, whereas the civil service one was based on actual pay, which was not notionally increased for pension purpises to reflect the notional pension contributions..When I left the civil service at the end of the 1980's, the notional pension contribution was 9.5%, meaning that, had my pension been calculated on the same basis as my private sector final salary scheme, .my civil service pension eould have bern 9.5% higher than it actually is.  When Maggie was knocking civil servants in the 1970's and papers like the Express were referring to feather-bedded, index-linked non-contributory civil service pensions, the salary reduction that paid for their pensions was conveniently overlooked.  Civil servants' pensions were only non-contributory in the way that someone on PAYE does not pay tax (in the sense of physically paying money to HMRC like a self-employed person does) because it was deducted from their pay before they received it. 

 

I am afraid that the government does rank arbitrary policy-led  targets above common sense. It was mentioned on the radio yesterday how short Border Force is of staff, how difficult it is to recruit, and that it will take a year to fully train them. Not so long ago, Border Force staff were cut to meet civil service-wide manpower reduction targets, regardless of the fact that the value of siezed contraband far exceeded their salaries.  

Edited April 13, 2022 by Ronaldo47
typos

[Higgs]

Proof reader wanted.

 

 

[Tracy D'arth]

1 minute ago, Ronaldo47 said:

It dhould vecremembeted (but seldom is) that, when the civil service prnsion schene was intoduced in the late 1940's, the szlararies of civil servxnts eas reduced by a certsin percentafe yo fund it. In the fsys begore computers,when wages were cslculated mznudlky by vkerks, this made sense. Unlije most privste srctor dchemes,;where prnsion was cdlcukated on sixtieths of years of service (allowing a pension if two-thirds finsl sxlary to be buikt up by 40 years service) , the civil service scheme was based on eightieths, meaning 40 years of service would only get you  a pension of half your final salary. It was even worse than that, because the private sector final salary was based on the gross salary before pension contributiobs were deducted, whwreas the civil service one based on actual pay, ehich was not notionslly increased for pension purpises to reflect the notional pension contributions..When I left the civil service at the end of the 1980's, the notional pension contribution was 9.5%, neaning that, had ny pension been calculated on the same basis as my private sector final salary scheme, .my civil service pension eould have bern 9.5% higher than it actually is.  When Maggie was knocking civil servants in the 1970's and papers like the Express were referring to feather-bedded, index-linked non-contributory civil service pensions, the salary reduction that paid for their pensions was conveniently overlooked.  Civil servants' pensions were only non-contributory in the way that someone on PAYE does not pay tax (in the sense of physically paying money to HMRC like a self-employed person does) because it was deducted from their pay before they received it. 

 

I am afraid that the government does rank arbitrary policy-led  targets above common sense. It was mentioned on the radio yesterday how short Border Force is of staff, how difficult it is to recruit, and that it will take a year to fully train them. Not so long ago, Border Force staff were cut to meet civil service-wide manpower reduction targets, regardless of the fact that the value of siezed contraband far exceeded their salaries.  

Struggling with your key board.

Fat finger on phone?

But the seized contraband is destroyed, so it has no value to offset against salaries.

[Ronaldo47]

3 minutes ago, Tracy D'arth said:

Struggling with your key board.

Fat finger on phone?

But the seized contraband is destroyed, so it has no value to offset against salaries.

Correct: computer presently u/s and I have issues with the small screen and virtual keyboard of my smartphone . 

Edited April 13, 2022 by Ronaldo47

[Hudds Lad]

i blame the vkerks  

4 minutes ago, Tracy D'arth said:

But the seized contraband is destroyed

 of course it is

[Tony Brooks]

31 minutes ago, Ronaldo47 said:

t should be remembered (but seldom is) that, when the civil service pension schene was intoduced in the late 1940's, the salararies of civil servxnts was reduced acriss the board by a few percent to fund it.

And when I was in Civil Service (1988) any increase in pay as recoemnded by the pay review body was then reduced by the X factor. The X factor was a reduction to allow for the pension and the supposed job security - tell that to all the civil servants who got privatized. So the reduction in pay for the pension was still going then and probably still is.

[Tracy D'arth]

1 hour ago, Hudds Lad said:

i blame the vkerks  

 of course it is

But this pushes up the value of the contraband.  Leading to more illegal actions.

A better idea with drugs would be to adulterate them with something very nasty and put it back on the street to make a profit for the enforcement services. I would open a shop!

Seized vehicles and boats are sold off to raise funds so why not?  

[Hudds Lad]

32 minutes ago, Tracy D'arth said:

But this pushes up the value of the contraband.  Leading to more illegal actions.

A better idea with drugs would be to adulterate them with something very nasty and put it back on the street to make a profit for the enforcement services. I would open a shop!

Seized vehicles and boats are sold off to raise funds so why not?  

I'd imagine some narcotics make their way to the medical profession for testing etc.

 

Poisoning the well only affects the end users, it won't harm the real scum like top level distributors/dealers, county lines gangs or those cuckooing with vulnerable users.

[Col_T]

36 minutes ago, Tracy D'arth said:

A better idea with drugs would be to adulterate them with something very nasty and put it back on the street

. . . and increase the NHS budget at the same time to deal with the fall-out!?

[Tracy D'arth]

27 minutes ago, Col_T said:

. . . and increase the NHS budget at the same time to deal with the fall-out!?

I was thinking along the lines of a gene dye to turn the user irredeemably purple.  The suppliers would soon die out when the market disappears.

[Mad Harold]

1 hour ago, Tracy D'arth said:

I was thinking along the lines of a gene dye to turn the user irredeemably purple.  The suppliers would soon die out when the market disappears.

Ah good, I thought for a moment you meant Arsenic! 

My mother used to tell me that you are better off dead than being a junkie. 

[Cheese]

4 hours ago, Ronaldo47 said:

...Unlike most private sector schemes,;where pension was calculated on sixtieths of years of service (allowing a pension if two-thirds finsl sxlary to be built up by 40 years service) , the civil service scheme was based on eightieths, meaning 40 years of service would only get you  a pension of half your final salary. ...

But I think the civil service scheme also paid a lump sum on retirement, of 3/80ths per year of service, making it broadly similar overall.  In private sector schemes taking a lump sum was optional, but doing so reduced the pension to closer to eightieths.