| Any of you young'uns seen the exciting pension news? 09:31 - Feb 5 with 11520 views | BanksterDebtSlave |
71. [Post edited 5 Feb 2024 9:32]
|  |
| |  |
| Any of you young'uns seen the exciting pension news? on 11:26 - Feb 5 with 2154 views | NthQldITFC |
| Any of you young'uns seen the exciting pension news? on 11:12 - Feb 5 by SuperKieranMcKenna |
Astonishing that immigration of 1m people a year, and birthrate in the top 10 in Europe is not enough to pay our pensions (“we need more people”, Ponzi scheme anyone?!). If that’s not enough population growth, then clearly it’s a house of cards, and we’ll destroy the planet long before we can collect a measly state pension…. |
Growth! Growth! Growth!
Cheap labour in!
Build! Build! Build!
Cheap labour gone!
Cough! Splutter! Dead! |  |
| |
| Any of you young'uns seen the exciting pension news? on 11:30 - Feb 5 with 2146 views | DanTheMan |
| Any of you young'uns seen the exciting pension news? on 11:12 - Feb 5 by SuperKieranMcKenna |
Astonishing that immigration of 1m people a year, and birthrate in the top 10 in Europe is not enough to pay our pensions (“we need more people”, Ponzi scheme anyone?!). If that’s not enough population growth, then clearly it’s a house of cards, and we’ll destroy the planet long before we can collect a measly state pension…. |
I think we're still massively under the 2.1 births per woman to keep the population at an even amount, we're still around 1.5. So immigration would be needed to keep the population even. Still, you're right that pensions are becoming increasingly unsustainable, taking up a huge portion of the Government spending at the cost of basically everything else. Of course, the Government (and previous ones) have not exactly tried encouraging people to have children, usually the opposite. So they rely on immigration to top us up to pay for an ever-older population, but they aren't being honest about why they do it.
Looking at it incredibly brutally as well, keeping people alive into their 90s with complex health conditions also costs a hell of a lot of money. It's the right thing to do we don't want to just let people die, but there is a real financial cost to it.
I don't think there's a very good answer here. Maybe means testing pensions like every other benefit, but that'll go down like a lead balloon with a lot of people I imagine. |  |
| |
| Any of you young'uns seen the exciting pension news? on 11:46 - Feb 5 with 2104 views | SuperKieranMcKenna |
| Any of you young'uns seen the exciting pension news? on 11:30 - Feb 5 by DanTheMan |
I think we're still massively under the 2.1 births per woman to keep the population at an even amount, we're still around 1.5. So immigration would be needed to keep the population even. Still, you're right that pensions are becoming increasingly unsustainable, taking up a huge portion of the Government spending at the cost of basically everything else. Of course, the Government (and previous ones) have not exactly tried encouraging people to have children, usually the opposite. So they rely on immigration to top us up to pay for an ever-older population, but they aren't being honest about why they do it.
Looking at it incredibly brutally as well, keeping people alive into their 90s with complex health conditions also costs a hell of a lot of money. It's the right thing to do we don't want to just let people die, but there is a real financial cost to it.
I don't think there's a very good answer here. Maybe means testing pensions like every other benefit, but that'll go down like a lead balloon with a lot of people I imagine. |
So if you have one million immigrants last year, you’d then need multiples of one million to pay their pensions, as well as the existing people drawing a pension. And so on and so on, as the numbers of people compound…totally unsustainable.
The whole state pension system needs a rethink. I’m resigned to never receiving one… |  | | |
| Any of you young'uns seen the exciting pension news? on 11:48 - Feb 5 with 2094 views | itfcjoe |
| Any of you young'uns seen the exciting pension news? on 10:32 - Feb 5 by Keno |
Has she looked into 'buying additional years' for her state pension? |
She's actually ok with it, but lots of her friends from when she worked at Sainsburys are still creaking through night shifts when would have changed jobs in late 50s if they knew they still had a decade to go etc, especially those who are widowed or divorced |  |
| |
| Any of you young'uns seen the exciting pension news? on 11:49 - Feb 5 with 2090 views | EastboundSplinter |
Another Brexit benefit. There are dozens! |  | | |
| Any of you young'uns seen the exciting pension news? on 11:56 - Feb 5 with 2065 views | DanTheMan |
| Any of you young'uns seen the exciting pension news? on 11:46 - Feb 5 by SuperKieranMcKenna |
So if you have one million immigrants last year, you’d then need multiples of one million to pay their pensions, as well as the existing people drawing a pension. And so on and so on, as the numbers of people compound…totally unsustainable.
The whole state pension system needs a rethink. I’m resigned to never receiving one… |
Yup, it'll never work unless the population continuously grows. Well, I say never work, it's obviously still "working" now but we just have to pay more for it at the expense of everything else. There'll be a point where people say "Hang on, this isn't really fair". I think we've already passed the point where a certain generation gets more out than they paid in. | |
| |
| Any of you young'uns seen the exciting pension news? on 12:35 - Feb 5 with 2018 views | BlueNomad |
Wait until some swivel eyed loon on the right suggests an annual cull of pensioners when they turn 70...................... (apart from them and their rich mates of course) |  | | |
| Any of you young'uns seen the exciting pension news? on 12:46 - Feb 5 with 1998 views | tractordownsouth |
The state pension won't exist by the time I'm that age anyway |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Any of you young'uns seen the exciting pension news? on 12:47 - Feb 5 with 1995 views | NthQldITFC |
| Any of you young'uns seen the exciting pension news? on 11:56 - Feb 5 by DanTheMan |
Yup, it'll never work unless the population continuously grows. Well, I say never work, it's obviously still "working" now but we just have to pay more for it at the expense of everything else. There'll be a point where people say "Hang on, this isn't really fair". I think we've already passed the point where a certain generation gets more out than they paid in. |
And as the human population grows, nature dies, but we're so focussed on comfort and progress and 'wealth' that we can't see that we're cutting the rug from under our feet and dooming our children.
Except we can all see it, but we're too scared to admit it let alone too selfish to do anything about it. | |
| |
| Any of you young'uns seen the exciting pension news? on 12:53 - Feb 5 with 1982 views | TractorWood |
| Any of you young'uns seen the exciting pension news? on 12:46 - Feb 5 by tractordownsouth |
The state pension won't exist by the time I'm that age anyway |
Agree. About 10 years ago they increased the employee and employer minimum contributions to defined contribution schemes. Effectively putting the onus onto the private sector.
For the first time they are increasing the minimum age you can even withdraw this to 57 soon. |  |
| |
| Any of you young'uns seen the exciting pension news? on 12:55 - Feb 5 with 1973 views | baxterbasics |
| Any of you young'uns seen the exciting pension news? on 12:53 - Feb 5 by TractorWood |
Agree. About 10 years ago they increased the employee and employer minimum contributions to defined contribution schemes. Effectively putting the onus onto the private sector.
For the first time they are increasing the minimum age you can even withdraw this to 57 soon. |
In reality, as much as it sucks this is unavoidable considering many people retiring at that age will live another 30 or 40 years more, some as many as 50! |  |
| |
| Any of you young'uns seen the exciting pension news? on 13:30 - Feb 5 with 1913 views | Help |
Please remember this is the state pension age. As we are all supposed to have a company or own pension going forward eventually there won't be a state payment for pension. You can all retire when you want if you can afford it. What age you choose on your pension plan and the state pension are different things. You might want to retire at 65. But not receive your state pension until and if you reach the state pension age. |  |
| |
| Any of you young'uns seen the exciting pension news? on 13:50 - Feb 5 with 1879 views | Leaky |
| Any of you young'uns seen the exciting pension news? on 09:48 - Feb 5 by nodge_blue |
Its a bit contradictory to have a report suggesting a raise to 71 based on maths, but in the article a sentence that says 50% of 70 year olds are unable to work due to physically or mentally not being capable.
I cant see any government introducing legislation to do that. Even if they say its the maths, common sense says it won't work. [Post edited 5 Feb 2024 9:50]
|
People that are deemed not to be mentally capable of working at 70. I feel US presidents are proof of this. [Post edited 5 Feb 2024 13:52]
|  | | |
| Any of you young'uns seen the exciting pension news? on 14:12 - Feb 5 with 1836 views | ElderGrizzly |
| Any of you young'uns seen the exciting pension news? on 09:34 - Feb 5 by nodge_blue |
Isn't that just a report rather than a thing? |
It is a report, but it will be based on a 'leak' and some testing of the waters by the Govt.
It happens with most new Govt policy. Find a friendly client journalist, see how people react and either double down, edit or quietly retire the idea. |  | | |
| Any of you young'uns seen the exciting pension news? on 14:14 - Feb 5 with 1832 views | ElderGrizzly |
| Any of you young'uns seen the exciting pension news? on 11:30 - Feb 5 by DanTheMan |
I think we're still massively under the 2.1 births per woman to keep the population at an even amount, we're still around 1.5. So immigration would be needed to keep the population even. Still, you're right that pensions are becoming increasingly unsustainable, taking up a huge portion of the Government spending at the cost of basically everything else. Of course, the Government (and previous ones) have not exactly tried encouraging people to have children, usually the opposite. So they rely on immigration to top us up to pay for an ever-older population, but they aren't being honest about why they do it.
Looking at it incredibly brutally as well, keeping people alive into their 90s with complex health conditions also costs a hell of a lot of money. It's the right thing to do we don't want to just let people die, but there is a real financial cost to it.
I don't think there's a very good answer here. Maybe means testing pensions like every other benefit, but that'll go down like a lead balloon with a lot of people I imagine. |
If you have a private pension that is delivering over a certain amount a year, there is definitely an argument to incrementally reduce the state pension. | | | |
| Any of you young'uns seen the exciting pension news? on 14:22 - Feb 5 with 1807 views | Keno |
| Any of you young'uns seen the exciting pension news? on 14:14 - Feb 5 by ElderGrizzly |
If you have a private pension that is delivering over a certain amount a year, there is definitely an argument to incrementally reduce the state pension. |
there was a proposal a few years back back to allow people to contract out of the full state pension with a proportion of their MI being paid into a personal pension |  |
| |
| Any of you young'uns seen the exciting pension news? on 14:39 - Feb 5 with 1776 views | factual_blue |
| Any of you young'uns seen the exciting pension news? on 12:53 - Feb 5 by TractorWood |
Agree. About 10 years ago they increased the employee and employer minimum contributions to defined contribution schemes. Effectively putting the onus onto the private sector.
For the first time they are increasing the minimum age you can even withdraw this to 57 soon. |
..And they'll continue to maintain a ten year difference with the State Pension, so it'll end up an 61, and no doubt continue to rise. |  |
| |
| Any of you young'uns seen the exciting pension news? on 14:41 - Feb 5 with 1774 views | giant_stow |
| Any of you young'uns seen the exciting pension news? on 14:39 - Feb 5 by factual_blue |
..And they'll continue to maintain a ten year difference with the State Pension, so it'll end up an 61, and no doubt continue to rise. |
I haven't read the thread yet, but saw you were the last replier - have you mentioned your gold plated pension?! |  |
| |
| Any of you young'uns seen the exciting pension news? on 14:54 - Feb 5 with 1750 views | ElderGrizzly |
| Any of you young'uns seen the exciting pension news? on 14:41 - Feb 5 by giant_stow |
I haven't read the thread yet, but saw you were the last replier - have you mentioned your gold plated pension?! |
Those with the old Civil Service pensions, will be the first to go in The Purge... | | | |
| Any of you young'uns seen the exciting pension news? on 14:59 - Feb 5 with 1749 views | DJR |
Leaving aside the triple lock, things aren't actually that bleak on the pensions' cost front (it is currently is 5.1% of GDP).
In a sane world, we would follow the recent IFS proposals.
https://ifs.org.uk/publications/future-state-pension
They proposed the government should ditch the triple lock and instead link the state pension to median earnings, and said that the triple lock results in unpredictable and sometimes overly generous increases to the state pension. They also argued that increasing the state pension age to compensate for the expense of the triple lock is unfair to those with lower life expectancy who tend to be poorer.
These were their proposals.
1. There will be a government target level for the new state pension, expressed as a share of median full-time earnings. Increases in the state pension will in the long run keep pace with growth in average earnings, which ensures that pensioners benefit when living standards rise.
2. Both before and after the target level is reached, the state pension will continue to increase at least in line with inflation every year.
3. The state pension will not be means-tested.
4. The state pension age will only rise as longevity at older ages increases, and never by the full amount of that longevity increase. To increase confidence and understanding, the government will write to people around their 50th birthday stating what their state pension age is expected to be. Their state pension age would then be fully guaranteed 10 years before they reach it.
Sadly, we don't live in a sane world, and I rather fear the next government (of whatever persuasion) will increase the state pension age more than is justified rather than doing anything about the triple lock.
The problem though with burying our head in the sand is that at some stage a future government will decide the system is not affordable, and do something drastic and generationally and socially even more unfair, when a rational and honest approach from the outset would not lead to that effect. [Post edited 5 Feb 2024 15:18]
|  | | |
| Any of you young'uns seen the exciting pension news? on 15:05 - Feb 5 with 1723 views | DanTheMan |
| Any of you young'uns seen the exciting pension news? on 14:59 - Feb 5 by DJR |
Leaving aside the triple lock, things aren't actually that bleak on the pensions' cost front (it is currently is 5.1% of GDP).
In a sane world, we would follow the recent IFS proposals.
https://ifs.org.uk/publications/future-state-pension
They proposed the government should ditch the triple lock and instead link the state pension to median earnings, and said that the triple lock results in unpredictable and sometimes overly generous increases to the state pension. They also argued that increasing the state pension age to compensate for the expense of the triple lock is unfair to those with lower life expectancy who tend to be poorer.
These were their proposals.
1. There will be a government target level for the new state pension, expressed as a share of median full-time earnings. Increases in the state pension will in the long run keep pace with growth in average earnings, which ensures that pensioners benefit when living standards rise.
2. Both before and after the target level is reached, the state pension will continue to increase at least in line with inflation every year.
3. The state pension will not be means-tested.
4. The state pension age will only rise as longevity at older ages increases, and never by the full amount of that longevity increase. To increase confidence and understanding, the government will write to people around their 50th birthday stating what their state pension age is expected to be. Their state pension age would then be fully guaranteed 10 years before they reach it.
Sadly, we don't live in a sane world, and I rather fear the next government (of whatever persuasion) will increase the state pension age more than is justified rather than doing anything about the triple lock.
The problem though with burying our head in the sand is that at some stage a future government will decide the system is not affordable, and do something drastic and generationally and socially even more unfair, when a rational and honest approach from the outset would not lead to that effect. [Post edited 5 Feb 2024 15:18]
|
The one thing I don't like about the "just increase the pension age" is that whilst we do live longer, people in their 70s are not going to be as fit to do things as those in their 60s. The older you get, the more chance of getting the sort of health conditions that would preclude you from actually enjoying your retirement.
Like you, I don't think any Government will do anything right now. Another one to chalk up to a lack of long term planning from both parties who only look at four (maybe eight at best) year cycles. | |
| |
| Any of you young'uns seen the exciting pension news? on 15:10 - Feb 5 with 1708 views | giant_stow |
| Any of you young'uns seen the exciting pension news? on 14:54 - Feb 5 by ElderGrizzly |
Those with the old Civil Service pensions, will be the first to go in The Purge... |
I'm tooling up now. | |
| |
| Any of you young'uns seen the exciting pension news? on 16:04 - Feb 5 with 1663 views | Help |
They also argued that increasing the state pension age to compensate for the expense of the triple lock is unfair to those with lower life expectancy who tend to be poorer.
Your answer is right there | |
| |
| Any of you young'uns seen the exciting pension news? on 17:31 - Feb 5 with 1619 views | factual_blue |
| Any of you young'uns seen the exciting pension news? on 14:41 - Feb 5 by giant_stow |
I haven't read the thread yet, but saw you were the last replier - have you mentioned your gold plated pension?! |
It's solid gold, with an Iridium filigree. | |
| |
| Any of you young'uns seen the exciting pension news? on 17:57 - Feb 5 with 1580 views | nodge_blue |
| Any of you young'uns seen the exciting pension news? on 14:14 - Feb 5 by ElderGrizzly |
If you have a private pension that is delivering over a certain amount a year, there is definitely an argument to incrementally reduce the state pension. |
That might have to happen. But its not fair on workers who have both paid their national insurance and also sacrificed salary to fund a pension. |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
