The second campaigning document I co-authored was with Colin Hines and Alan Simpson (then an MP). It was published in 2003. It was entitled People's Pensions. The New Economics Foundation published it. This is what they had to say of it:
This discussion paper suggests an entirely new arrangement for the provision of second pensions in the 21st Century.
The paper proposes an adaptable pension model much more insulated from market turbulence than orthodox schemes. And, as a result, a model that will be highly attractive for the millions of people seeking financial security in old age. It will be capable of raising large sums of money to invest in necessary public services and can easily be adapted to invest in immediate local priorities.
The People's Pension proposal was based on the following assumptions:
This was possible because:
Sound familiar? Of course People's Quantitative Easing is a development of that, in a sense.
But there is also no reason why they should not exist in parallel. As the report noted:
So, if there is a need to demonstrate that there might be a real market to match that for the funds to be subject to PQE this might be it.
After all, what is better? Investing your pension in speculation in stock exchange companies with high risk, money grabbing CEOs, low rates of innovation, high charges and no long term view amongst the lot of them or in building social housing, hospitals and schools where the funds are used to provide facilities that you, your family and community will benefit from both now an in retirement?
I still think the option should be on the table. Maybe it is an idea whose time has come.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
The purpose of pension investments has to be to improve the ability of the working population to support those not working. Your proposals do that.
That is the intention
It reflects the fundamental pension contract between the generations
A people’s pension invested for example in hospitals, or railways is an opportunity to work in some economic democracy into the public sector (correctly people’s). This can include membership as with mutuals and open agms with election to the governing body, for engaged citizenss and stakeholders. People then can have a stronger sense of ownership over what was and can be again be ours.
For too long the enemies of the public sector, which in effect are commons held in trust for us all, have been able to present public assets as belonging to an alian state. They then, when the can, put these assets up for sale and present it as an opportunity fo near gift undervalued assets which do do not belong to them . It does not need much thought to realise that only those that have money to buy will benefit to the extent of their ability to do so. This is a massive rip off on the scale of what happened in Russia with an emergent plutocratic cast, who then go on to seek to enclose all commons and reduce them into profit centres. Having destroyed the public sector, and with the NHS on the way, they are going for what remains of social housing by forcing the fire sale of the housing associations stock, Money lenders will be on standby to take advantage of right to buy. Investing in our pensions into public sector can be a means of reconstruction tthese as people’s commons.
The We Own It campaign is doing a great job on these issues. weownit.org.uk/
RIchard,
Remind us all again who says Green QE does not “work”:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-08-18/germany-struggles-too-much-renewable-energy
Looks like a problem worth having. Can’t beat the price (zero).
Reality is trying catching up with you again Richard.
Amazing…..