Print

Print


It’s all over the BBC!:

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7416524.stm

In April, the latest chapter of … Pension Trends said pensioner couples received on average £2,115 a year from private pensions. In fact, the real figure for couples is more than four times larger, at between £9,000 and £10,000 a year. “

The reason is straightforward i.e. 52 weeks in the year, not 12. Hence the ratio 4+ to one.

But should we not ban “on average” figures? The interesting thing is dispersion and variation. (Not sure what a “private pension” is – does it include all non-state pensions, or all non-occupational pensions?)

Although we all want a big one, pensions seem designed to perpetuate inequality into old age. (except that women recoup some of the gender inequalities by getting pensions earlier and living longer). If these two factors worked against women rather than against men, it would have been a big political issue a long time ago.

BTW one thing I’ve found recently is that you can buy stakeholder pensions for your kids. This has quite a lot of advantages – 25% tax enhancement; not counted for Inheritance tax; they can’t spend it till 50; also it is not counted on some means tests so if you invest enough of your income into pensions your income becomes extremely low.

Happy pension-hunting!

 

JOHN BIBBY
All statements are on behalf of aa42.com Limited, a company wholly owned by John Bibby and Shirley Bibby. See www.aa42.com/mathemagic and www.mathemagic.org


From: email list for Radical Statistics [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jay Ginn
Sent: 29 May 2008 11:42
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: ONS error

 

I heard from an obscure pensions website (ipe.com) that ONS made an error in the private pension receipts that were published in Pension Trends. I downloaded the article and could have attached it but thats not allowed on this list (?) and my email software doesnt allow me to edit/copy/paste from internet to body of email.

 

The error in calculation occurred because weekly amounts were treated as monthly amounts for some or all respondents to the survey.

 

Jay

****************************************************** Please note that if you press the 'Reply' button your message will go only to the sender of this message. If you want to reply to the whole list, use your mailer's 'Reply-to-All' button to send your message automatically to [log in to unmask] Disclaimer: The messages sent to this list are the views of the sender and cannot be assumed to be representative of the range of views held by subscribers to the Radical Statistics Group. To find out more about Radical Statistics and its aims and activities and read current and past issues of our newsletter you are invited to visit our web site www.radstats.org.uk. ******************************************************* ****************************************************** Please note that if you press the 'Reply' button your message will go only to the sender of this message. If you want to reply to the whole list, use your mailer's 'Reply-to-All' button to send your message automatically to [log in to unmask] Disclaimer: The messages sent to this list are the views of the sender and cannot be assumed to be representative of the range of views held by subscribers to the Radical Statistics Group. To find out more about Radical Statistics and its aims and activities and read current and past issues of our newsletter you are invited to visit our web site www.radstats.org.uk. *******************************************************