The State Pension

[Alanbileysfeathercut]

View attachment 306401

It’s the 50+ demographic who seem to be most in favour of that sort of thing. That 29% for Reform in the 65+ band are the definition of turkeys voting for Christmas.

Depends who you ask.
But , I live in Scotland, prescriptions are free ,and I would easily pay for mine ,as would plenty of others.
I know plenty of pensioners who would easily pay a flat fee ,a small amount, on public transport.
Every little helps.

 

[Woolverhampton_Blue]

Bad tory thinking this.

The population is growing, so theoretically there are more st the bottom of the age range than the top. You're talking about the aged demographic that paid for and gave you, as an infant, the NHS without which probably ½ the current population would have died earlier with terrible infant mortality rates. You want to pay them back by stopping their support as they become as enfeebled as a baby, with age?

The answer is not to kill off the aged (as Boris' plan with covid undoubtedly was) nor stop supporting them, it is to find it by taxing the wealthy 1% that owns 90% of the wealth, or whatever.

The solution is so easy. What's more, the 1% would still be enormously wealthy even after the tax.

Get out if the mindset that they sow - age v age, men v women, or whatever demographic of your choice v the other. That's how the establishment wants you to think.

I am on the left and would happily pay more tax for a better welfare state. I’m also not arguing we take money from the enfeebled, I’m saying there should be a cut off, as there is with most benefits.

My dream scenario would be a government who go after the incredibly wealthy and ensure they are paying a bigger share for the good of society, but unfortunately for us there is no mainstream political party willing to do that.

There are however parties who want the wealthy to pay less tax, to bury their head in the sand when it comes to climate change, and to stop funding and ultimately privatise the NHS. For some reason they are very popular with people over 50.

 

[Rita_Poon]

The State Pension in its current format is fast becoming an unsustainable burden on working people. I believe it currently accounts for around 11% of the annual budget and over 50% of welfare spending.

With the older demographic having played a big hand in delivering Brexit, and now doing something similar with Reform, is it time for us to look seriously and making a change? They are biting the hands of those who fund their benefits, and I feel it should no longer be tolerated.

My suggestion would be to scrap the triple lock immediately, before gradually moving to a means tested State Pension in tranches. The poorest will retain their full entitlement, but it will essentially be a generous form of Universal Credit for the elderly. We can use the money saved on education and skills training.

Discuss.

Didn't even fight in Nam.

:/

 

[Woolverhampton_Blue]

I was due a very large pension, stolen by Brown. Others were less fortunate but we all put in 45-50 years of work. My pension is enough for me and my wife to live comfortably but many others struggle far more than you do. No one gave us nice inheritance money, we worked every hour we could get while raising a family and whatever we have we earned. It does my head in listening to todays youth crying about what pensioners get, even though they put the years in to get it. Many pensioners still work well into their 70’s because they have a work ethic and need the money. It’s time people like yourself looked at yourselves, stop whinging and put in the hours and the years of work.

Sorry to say it like this and I didn’t mean to have a go at you, but I’m in my 70’s and still put in hours each week, to employ staff while extracting absolutely no pay. Many pensioners do similar, be it working, charity work, looking after others. If you want to have a go at anyone look at the politicians, not pensioners……..

Can you fill me in on the whole Brown fiasco? It was a bit before my time.

I don’t generally groan about it, Pete, I get on with my life and do work very hard. But it’s more than fair to question the thinking of people when on the one hand they are voting for a more selfish and uncaring society, yet cry murder when someone younger than them suggests something selfish and uncaring because on this particular occasion it directly affects them.

 

[Woolverhampton_Blue]

You should know when taking into account early retirement, the equation is based on the state pension top up at ,for me 67,which helps decide whether to stop working.
Here's something else you should know, I recieve zero benefits from the day I take early retirement till pension age.
And historically hard working folk tend not to live that long after retirement ,that's why most will retire early and spend a good chunk of the 25% ,all good for the economy.
And you can't really take much of the other 75% without getting taxed and a chunk of inheritance tax.

I can’t comment on your situation in particular because I don’t know all the facts.

The decision to either take a full lump sum and reduced pension or to fully crystallise a pot and take the full tax free cash entitlement at retirement really does depend on someone’s overall circumstances. I would argue that hard working folk are starting to live much longer than you suggest, and are often a bit too trigger happy when taking tax free benefits. People who take advice can usually be talked out of it, but there will be far more people making foolish decisions with nobody to stop them.

The inheritance tax situation around pensions is very much up in the air at the moment, so there’s not much point discussing it here.

 

[Woolverhampton_Blue]

Didn't even fight in Nam.

:/

Being British I’d probably have been safe regardless of when I was born.

 

[Old Blue 2]

I’m not suggesting we take people’s company or personal pensions away from them.

People are working very hard and contributing right now, but they won’t receive many of the benefits enjoyed by the generations preceding them. Why is that fair, but means testing an increasingly unaffordable state benefit unfair?



I hope you have a long and happy retirement

You are one of the thickos who doesn't understand/realise that, notwithstanding what Pete has posted previously, means-testing a system where the metric is that you only get it if you pay in, is a 100% mental abberation on your part. I worked in the DHSS/DS/Benefits Agency for over 30 years, and understand all about qualifying for certain benefits/payments. Means-testing is diametrically opposed to a contributory system. Do you even know what 'means-testing' means? I don't believe you do (but you can go and look it up now that I have posed the question). Too full of your own self-importance in what you do in your job...

 

[hallamblue]

You pay into National Insurance for a minimum of 35 years to fund your own state pension. If I'd had the opportunity to opt out and put that money in a private pension and not get a state pension I would have taken it because I don't trust the government. Any party that tries to abolish the state pension will lose straight away and quite right too. The state pension is about £12000 a year, could you live on that? As you say we should tax the rich more, but we certainly shouldn't prevent people who've paid in to a system for 35 years from getting the pension they're entitled to.

 

[Old Blue 2]

I am on the left and would happily pay more tax for a better welfare state. I’m also not arguing we take money from the enfeebled, I’m saying there should be a cut off, as there is with most benefits.

My dream scenario would be a government who go after the incredibly wealthy and ensure they are paying a bigger share for the good of society, but unfortunately for us there is no mainstream political party willing to do that.

There are however parties who want the wealthy to pay less tax, to bury their head in the sand when it comes to climate change, and to stop funding and ultimately privatise the NHS. For some reason they are very popular with people over 50.

Really? You REALLY are talking out of your backside here. To say that people over 50 subscribe to that view you have stated in your last paragraph shows that you may have had a good education to be doing the job you are presently employed in, but you show almost no common sense or intelligence...

 

[Street end man]

The State Pension in its current format is fast becoming an unsustainable burden on working people. I believe it currently accounts for around 11% of the annual budget and over 50% of welfare spending.

With the older demographic having played a big hand in delivering Brexit, and now doing something similar with Reform, is it time for us to look seriously and making a change? They are biting the hands of those who fund their benefits, and I feel it should no longer be tolerated.

My suggestion would be to scrap the triple lock immediately, before gradually moving to a means tested State Pension in tranches. The poorest will retain their full entitlement, but it will essentially be a generous form of Universal Credit for the elderly. We can use the money saved on education and skills training.

Discuss.

Best cancelling pensions and giving it to the boat people. All for it me.

View attachment 306401

It’s the 50+ demographic who seem to be most in favour of that sort of thing. That 29% for Reform in the 65+ band are the definition of turkeys voting for Christmas.

The definition of turkeys voting for christmas were the ballbags who voted starmer and his 2 tier anti British ideas in.

 

[Bishop Thumpety-Thump]

Too full of your own self-importance

Have you read any of your own posts?

 

[Rita_Poon]

Shots fired or just blanks?

I can't keep up.

 

[Rita_Poon]

 

[Woolverhampton_Blue]

You are one of the thickos who doesn't understand/realise that, notwithstanding what Pete has posted previously, means-testing a system where the metric is that you only get it if you pay in, is a 100% mental abberation on your part. I worked in the DHSS/DS/Benefits Agency for over 30 years, and understand all about qualifying for certain benefits/payments. Means-testing is diametrically opposed to a contributory system. Do you even know what 'means-testing' means? I don't believe you do (but you can go and look it up now that I have posed the question). Too full of your own self-importance in what you do in your job...

People aren’t thick or self important just because they make points you don’t like or agree with.

I’m not going to look it up. My understanding is that it means there are conditions around whether you qualify based on your income or assets i.e. your means. If I’ve got that wrong then apologies.

 

[Bishop Thumpety-Thump]

People aren’t thick or self important just because they make points you don’t like or agree with.

Yeah I notice both him and Pete have made insulting comments to you in this thread, yet they'd be the first to complain about ad hominem attacks/playing the man not the ball etc.