Interesting discussion on #BBCBreakfast about @mariecurieuk proposals to enable terminally-ill people of working age to claim state pensions and/or Pension Credit. While I understand the reasons for this proposal, I don't think it is the right solution. 1/
@mariecurieuk Firstly, the argument appears to be based on the idea that NI contributions are payments into a pension fund. But NI contributions are taxes, not pension contributions.
Secondly, according to @mariecurieuk, terminally-ill people have on average paid 24 years of NICs. But this isn't enough to entitle them to a full state pension. Most terminally-ill people would thus also need to claim Pension Credit (which the charity also proposes).
If Government introduced a means for some people of working-age to claim state pensions because they have paid NICs, it would be very hard not to make the case for ANYONE to be able to claim state pensions once they have paid more than the minimum 10 years.
And indeed for relatives of people who died before reaching state pension age to claim state pensions as an inheritance.
Enabling terminally-ill people to claim state pensions purely on the grounds that they have "paid in" would open a Pandora's box.
It really is time this issue was put to bed once and for all. NICs are not contributions to a pension scheme. They are taxes. There is no fund, no investments and nothing to draw on.
The state pension is a welfare benefit intended for the relief of poverty in old age.
That said, @mariecurieUK is right to highlight the appalling treatment of terminally-ill working-age people under the present system, which results in many of them experiencing abject poverty.
A wedge has been driven between working-age benefits and the state pension in the name of forcing people to work. Demonisation of benefit claimants has led directly to policy changes that intentionally cause poverty among working-age people, including the terminally ill.
Poverty among terminally-ill people is not a bug, it's a feature of a harsh and callous system. State pensioners are excluded from the misery of this system. No wonder @MarieCurieUK wants the state pension extended to people who aren't old enough to claim it.
But the solution is to be more generous and compassionate towards working-age people who through no fault of their own are unable to work. Raise benefit levels, end stringent fitness-to-work tests, eliminate harsh sanctions. This is what @MarieCurieUK should be campaigning for.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
I love @MikeBurgersburg dearly, but he wasn't the the first to draw attention to problems at #CelsiusNetwork. I was, by more than 6 months. And he wasn't the first to declare Alameda insolvent, either. Again, I was. Why am I being ignored, @taylorlorenz? @washingtonpost
In April 2021, I wrote detailed threads about Celsius in which I took their terms of service apart, examined their published accounts, and analysed their marketing material. I warned people then that it was taking huge risks with people's funds and was possibly insolvent.
I took massive amounts of abuse from Celsians for these threads. Among other things, they accused me of being paid by Coindesk to discredit Celsius. I write for Coindesk, but I'm not employed by them. I would never do hit work for them or anyone else.
NYAG: Celsius lent $1bn to Alameda against collateral constisting largely of FTX's token FTT. ag.ny.gov/sites/default/…
NYAG: On 16th May 2022, Mashinsky falsely told investors that Celsius was solvent. In fact its liabilities exceeded its assets by $820 million.
NYAG: In May 2022, when Celsius was already insolvent and suffering a bank run that eventually proved terminal, Mashinsky was actively recruiting new depositors by offering financial incentives for referrals from existing customers.
I've seen this type of comment a number of times now. Crypto people seem to think they have control and ownership rights over funds they loan. But this isn't how financial loans work. They are more like temporary gifts. Ownership and control of funds transfers to the recipient.
Some collateralised loans (repos, for example) are explicitly structured as a spot sale and forward purchase of securities. Celsius's loans were structured like this. So when Celsius loaned funds, ownership rights and control of the collateral transferred to Celsius.
I'd be willing to bet that the same people who didn't realise ownership and control of the coins the deposited in interest-bearing accounts transferred to Celsius also didn't realise that coins they used as collateral against borrowing also became Celsius's to own and control.
My first, and perhaps most important observation, is that this report is written by a single author who is evidently supportive of gender-critical arguments and hence hardly an unbiased researcher. This statement could have come straight from Sex Matters.
The dishonesty and gaslighting is really why I stopped writing about Brexit. I debunked some of the lies, but like the Hydra, whenever a lie was debunked, two more grew in its place. It was utterly dispiriting.
To be fair, Brexit is far from the only Hydra-like belief system. Social media makes it very easy to create and spread lies, and very difficult to debunk them. And because the lies reinforce the belief, debunking them attracts abuse from believers.
So I've now read Sherelle Jacobs' writings from last October onwards, and I've concluded she hasn't the faintest idea what "Judeo-Christian values" even are.
In this piece from October, which pretty much covers what she said at the Battle of Ideas, she talks about "Methodist values". But she didn't bother to find out what those actually are, though the Methodist Church publishes them. telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/10/0… methodist.org.uk/our-work/our-w…
But at the Battle of Ideas she talked about "Judeo-Christian values". This is a dogwhistle term deployed by the far right to subsume Judaism into Christianity (thereby eliminating Jews) and exclude Islam. It is thus antisemitic and Islamophobic. theconversation.com/why-judeo-chri…