Thought Id start this one going because its rather dead on this board at the moment and I suppose all my usual muckers are either at the Stella tennis event watching Dim Tim (lose again) or at Henly Regatta eating cucumber sandwiches (they wish,...NOT).

Anyway please feel free to just talk to yourself blast away and let it go on any company or subject you wish. Just wish Id thought of this one before.

cheers GF.

.

Is that Xenophobic?

Some years ago while sitting in a pub in Cardiff, I heard a Welshman blaming the English for all the problems that Wales had at the time. (It wasn't Dil.)

He said to his mate Dai "I think we could solve all the problems we have by kicking all those of -- English origin out, get rid of them."

Dai responded, "That is a good idea, but wait a moment, that would mean there would be only me and you left. Who would serve the beer?"

From: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/pensions-retirement/financial-planning/the-state-pension-loophole-thats-given-me-1300-more-per-year-for/?WT.mc_id=e_DM190494&WT.tsrc=email&etype=Edi_Pfi_New_Mon&utm_source=email&utm_medium=Edi_Pfi_New_Mon_2016_11_02&utm_campaign=DM190494

‘The state pension loophole that's given me £1,300 more per year for life’

Priscilla Park Weir has stopped taking her state pension for two years - and will get a 20pc boost.
CREDIT: JOHN LAWRENCE FOR THE TELEGRAPH
Sam Brodbeck
1 NOVEMBER 2016 • 10:16AM

People already drawing their state pension are being urged to consider a generous loophole that could boost their income by thousands of pounds a year in exchange for "unretiring".

The process - which critics say the Government does too little to publicise - is especially helpful for those in good health and who have sources of income in addition to their state pension.

Like many others, Priscilla Park Weir turned 60, only to discover her state pension was going to be far less than she imagined.

She took her entitlement, around £6,200 a year, for eight years before stumbling across a little-known way to up the income - by opting to forgo the payments for a period.

Mrs Park Weir's husband served in the Army, so the couple frequently moved, making it difficult for her to have an uninterrupted work record.

Although she took on secretarial work in the last 20 years of her career, when it came time to begin drawing her state pension, in 2007, she only qualified for the basic level.

In 2015, Mrs Park Weir decided she wanted to boost these payments to supplement the small income from two other private pensions, worth around £350 a month.

There are three ways to boost your state pension, though not all apply to everyone.

You can fill in missing National Insurance years, known as "Class 3 voluntary contributions"; or make a top-up using "Class 3A" contributions that buy up to £25 a week extra; or, lastly, defer taking your pension.


Mrs Park Weir checked to see how much it would cost her to use the "Class 3A" top-up scheme. To add just £25 a week to her pension would have cost her £20,000 in a lump sum.

Instead, she decided to "unretire". Such a delay in taking the state pension can provide an extremely generous uplift for people who have other income to live on.

If you reached state pension age before April 2016, every year you defer adds 10.4pc to payments.

You don't have to defer for entire years - for every five weeks you don't take a pension, you'll get an increase of 1pc.

Deferring is open even if you are already receiving your pension.

Mrs Park Weir stopped drawing her pension in 2015 and plans to restart next year.

She will lose £12,400 as a result but gain an extra £1,290 annually when the payments begin again. This £25-a-week boost comes in at £7,600 cheaper than if she had used the "Class 3A" lump-sum method.

"Instead of using that money to top up, I set it aside to make up the lost income. In reality I have only used about £3,000 of that in the first year as I find being thrifty easy.

"Where else can you get a 10pc increase a year? I'm tempted to do it for longer because it is such a good investment."

But there are some catches to "unretiring". It is far more generous for people who are under the old state pension system, in place before April 2016.

For those retiring after April 2016, the increase you get by deferring roughly halves to 5.8pc.

Separately, the extra income you get by deferring is not increased by the "triple lock" that applies to normal pensions payments.

very sad and dangerous for the world Clinton will be president a liar and crook running the USA , you could not make this up its fact , being bent is the only way to riches

Crooked Hilary indeed. But I thought you were rich Tanker.

most intelligent and thinking americans are horrified at the thought of either trump or clinton being in the white house

in passing, there was a very interesting article on the radio yesterday about the (very right wing as it happens) manipulation of the american press and its very partisan and distorted reporting
if you want to know more, look up along the lines of "clinton says she'll close most coal mines" ..... read how the press reported that comment, and then read the relevant part of the speech surrounding that

Non-EU migrants will see their partner's banned from coming to the UK if they have an outstanding debt of £500 with the NHS, according to reports.
Amber Rudd, the Home Secretary, is expected to announce that those living in the UK with debts could also be refused "leave to remain".
It follows the news that hit squads of debt collectors are to be sent into hospitals to collect payment from health tourists.

Ha Ha. Another joke. First identify them before you treat them. Withhold their passports. Know where they live and the reasons for their being in the country in the first place. They will be long gone before the "hit and miss squads" arrive.
I got fed up with the NHS and use a private hospital. When I arrive at reception, the first question is "how do you propose to pay?". Now what is so difficult about that? No hit squads required.

Manuel,

Does "most intelligent and thinking americans are horrified at the thought of either trump or clinton being in the white house"
mean similar minded individuals?

Just asking.

Court says no PM Brexit. She has to ask Parliament.

This morning the High Court ruled on a court action against Theresa May to prevent her using executive powers under the royal prerogative to start the process of leaving the European Union.

Opponents argue the prime minister cannot use the prerogative to trigger Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty without the prior authority of Parliament and a vote from MPs.

More (LIVE) at http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/11/03/high-court-to-rule-on-brexit-legal-battle-and-theresa-mays-decis/

so why do we bother to vote on any issue , it is now pointless , a police state is coming

will now never bother to vote again

Rosie.

The Courts are the last bastion to prevent the introduction of a Police State and maintain the "sovereignty" of "Government" and the "elected representatives".

That is part of their function, whether the court decision is to your liking or not.

74394 - no; there are many lifelong voters in both camps who now shudder at even their own party's candidate being elected


74399 - it could also be argued (and yes there is also a valid counter) that there was a referendum in which the country's majority voted for "out", and it is that that should be honoured


btw fred, there's an earlier post of yours which requires my attention and a sensible response, but have not yet had time and shall shortly be out for an hour or so in "the punishment block" :-)

Manuel.

74400,

I shudder at the thought of a Trump as President of the USA, in fact I shudder at the thought of Trump, who appears to me to be a psychopath.

I am not sure whether Clinton has been smeared or not, but the "crimes" she has committed seem to amount to little in practice.

If the Russians can read the e-mails, it suggests that security should be tightened.

So what was it 17 million ? voted out and some old crony with a wig and half a father christmas costume decides it's down to 600 odd people whether we can leave or not.

Well that seems fair.

i agree fred, but hillary is almost as slimy as trump is a complete loose cannon

the fbi's unsubstantiated smear was clearly orchestrated by hardline republicans, and it is appalling to think that it was even permitted under american legislation so close to election time ....... uk law of course does not permit

dil - get your facts straight about (a) the wording of the referendum and (b) what the court therefore ruled on

consensus is that the gov't would win the vote on triggering article 50, but it's the murky bits afterwards that have yet to be determined

fred - post 74374 - primarily focuses on immigration
as i have written many times, there were lots of good reasons to stay in the eu as there were for getting out
it happens that i ultimately decided to vote "out" while you were in the other camp - fair enough

the real problem as i see it with the setting up of sangatte and subsequently "the jungle" is that the french and the eu so-called ruling body allowed the refugees freedom of movement throughout eu in the first place

the refugees may have had uk targeted as their first preference for relocation, but that is not only irrelevant but is also no excuse for them being allowed to set up camp as close to the uk border as was physically possible

if i have correctly understood eu rules on refugees, they are meant to stay put in their first safe point of entry - eg they arrive somewhere along the italian coast; they are meant to stay in italy - until checked out and duly processed
that has clearly not been the case

==================

veering slightly ......
many brexiters shout very loudly that the immigrants are stealing 000s of low(er) paid, minimum legal wage jobs from uk indigenous youth

you imply, almost certainly correctly, that "uk indigenous youth" will not do these jobs as (presumably) they feel it is beneath their dignity and/or the difference between doing those jobs and claiming benefits is negligible


i am sure i shall now get shot at by some here :-)

Maybe if Clinton and Obama's state department hadn't tried every delaying trick in the book, including producing files at a snail's pace, shredding evidence after a subpoena, smashing phones etc, the investigation may have been over a long time ago. Fact is that the strategy was designed to delay until the closed period. Various attempts were made in court to speed up the release of documents relating to Clinton's time as Sec of State, not just the emails. I don't believe for one moment that the FBI was influenced by republicans, hard line or otherwise. Comey was damned if he did and damned if he didn't. Liars need good memories, otherwise they will be caught out in the end.