Al,
An interesting post from Conservative Home there. And I use the word interesting in the same way one might use the word egregious to describe someone like politicians or Treasury officials. The use of the word 'idleness' will surely get peoples' backs up and probably isn't the way to get people on board after a 40-50 years of slogging away, before spending their final years with family and doing things they want to do rather than have to do. And whilst they may have a point about the general direction of travel vis-a- via life expectancy and affordability, I wouldn't be at all surprised if any Govt that decided to pull the plug on pensions retrospectively after people have contributed via NICs (I do realise they pay for current rather than future liabilities) wasn't challenged, both in the Commons (more likely if we continue to move towards a true multi-party system with smaller majorities & Coalitions) and in the courts.
But what really astounds me about the Conservative Home post is that they talk as though they genuinely believe that Govt policy on pensions, savings and retirement etc is coherent and that this plan will actually work. It's nothing of the sort and you only have to look at the example of politicians on the one hand extolling the virtue of responsibility and saving for the future whilst simultaneously doing everything they can to tax us into penury and wrap us up in red tape. The public will only accept what is being discussed here when the politicians accept that they need to stop screwing people over to plug the gaps due to their fiscal incompetence.