The State Pension

[Yarrgh]

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.

100% this.

 

[Bishop Thumpety-Thump]

And you think you are not thick, or self-important? Do me, and all of us, a favour.

How about you just speak for yourself, and not everyone else?

From where I’m sitting, there’s only one person in this thread that’s coming across as full of their own self importance.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

100% this.

It's not really about that. It's about whether something is affordable when the fundamental conditions that existed when it was introduced are no longer there.

• People live around 20 years longer than they did when it was introduced (and aren't always living in good health so require higher state spending in their dotage - see a later point). Thus, the amount doled out per person is much greater.
• Demographically, the Baby Boomer generation is very large, so there are a lot of people living a lot longer, thus the total amount doled out is much greater.
• Also demographically, there are far fewer people of working age per retiree now. I think the ratio is around 2, whereas it was around 6 when the pension was introduced. As hopefully everyone knows, your pension is paid for by the taxes of working people, so this shift is very important.
• Government finances are in a mess. There has been a budget deficit pretty much every year for the last 30 years, so no government in living memory has really "lived within its means". As a result, debt repayments now are a huge slice of the annual budget.
• As a result, despite taxation being a higher percentage of GDP than any time since the war, the government is unable to do pretty basic things because increasing amounts are spent on things like pensions and debt repayment.

Of course, nothing really changes as people kick up a merry stink whenever things are proposed that are perfectly reasonable, like adjusting the retirement age to life expectancy, or means testing the winter fuel payment (did tens of thousands of pensioners actually die this winter because of the changes, as was predicted by some?), so the can is proverbially kicked down the road.

 

[Exeter_Gently]

It's not really about that. It's about whether something is affordable when the fundamental conditions that existed when it was introduced are no longer there.

• People live around 20 years longer than they did when it was introduced (and aren't always living in good health so require higher state spending in their dotage - see a later point). Thus, the amount doled out per person is much greater.
• Demographically, the Baby Boomer generation is very large, so there are a lot of people living a lot longer, thus the total amount doled out is much greater.
• Also demographically, there are far fewer people of working age per retiree now. I think the ratio is around 2, whereas it was around 6 when the pension was introduced. As hopefully everyone knows, your pension is paid for by the taxes of working people, so this shift is very important.
• Government finances are in a mess. There has been a budget deficit pretty much every year for the last 30 years, so no government in living memory has really "lived within its means". As a result, debt repayments now are a huge slice of the annual budget.
• As a result, despite taxation being a higher percentage of GDP than any time since the war, the government is unable to do pretty basic things because increasing amounts are spent on things like pensions and debt repayment.

Of course, nothing really changes as people kick up a merry stink whenever things are proposed that are perfectly reasonable, like adjusting the retirement age to life expectancy, or means testing the winter fuel payment (did tens of thousands of pensioners actually die this winter because of the changes, as was predicted by some?), so the can is proverbially kicked down the road.

Any idea why this is?

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Any idea why this is?

I would hazard a guess that it's a fundamental aspect of politics. Politicians globally seem to like to over promise things and not ask current taxpayers to pay for those things as that might lose them votes.

 

[hallamblue]

Technically paying NI just qualifies you for a state pension. There is no 'paying in' as such. It is not a pension scheme. The Government don't invest it like happens with a private pension. The current state pension is paid for by the current workforce which is dwindling. It's one of the reasons why pensioners, and those approaching pension age, need to think very hard about voting for the likes of Reform who want a Net Zero Immigration policy. Net zero immigration means that the number legally allowed to enter the UK to live and work each year should equal the number emigrating.

As a nation we are having less children and living longer. Among the British-born population, the proportion of retired people is growing, while the proportion of working age is shrinking. Without major improvements in productivity, a shrinking workforce will inevitably produce less wealth to sustain the retired population.

There is a ticking pensions time bomb. I do think that at some point in the future there will be huge changes to the state pension because it will absolutely become unaffordable if something doesn't change.

I understand that the government has failed to invest my money and has used it to fund current pensioners, unlike countries like Australia and Norway who have sensible governments and don't have a pension timebomb. However the fact remains that I've paid into a scheme for 35 years and therefore should be entitled to claim from it. It'll be more like 45 years of contributions by the time I retire. The government needs to put a wealth tax on the super rich to dig itself out of the hole that we've been digging since 1979. If it doesn't we'll just accumulate more and more debt, and punishing pensioners and disabled people for the faults of rampant capitalism is frankly unfair.

 

[Littlesue]

Raise the age of it, life expectancy is far higher now. People are able to work longer and should.

Lol, do you work in an office?

 

[arch stanton]

Race to the bottom, lets pick on the olds. Then lets go after the disabled, what have they ever contributed. etc

 

[JimmyJeffers]

Honestly mate, if the older generation want to vote Conservative and Reform that’s fine, but they can at least do us all a favour and live by the principles of those parties (look out for yourself, pull yourself up by your bootstraps, etc) rather than expecting the benefits a well funded welfare state provides. State Pensions and the NHS are very socialist ideals, and they clearly don’t seem to be leaning that way in the voting booth. Let’s give them what they’re voting for.

Agreed. Voting preference should be made public for everyone. Vote reform and you can live in your anti science utopia, be barred from using the NHS and only be allowed to eat minging old person British food.

 

[Daveysgingerlovechild]

Agreed. Voting preference should be made public for everyone. Vote reform and you can live in your anti science utopia, be barred from using the NHS and only be allowed to eat minging old person British food.

I dont vote reform, but would i still be allowed this?

As a treat. Now and then.

 

[Daveysgingerlovechild]

Best cancelling pensions and giving it to the boat people. All for it me.
The definition of turkeys voting for christmas were the ballbags who voted starmer and his 2 tier anti British ideas in.

What are these anti-British ideas mate? I've not really paid much attention to politics lately. What's he been up to?

 

[JimmyJeffers]

I dont vote reform, but would i still be allowed this?

As a treat. Now and then.

Mince for breakfast for you lovechild. No seasoning

 

[JimmyJeffers]

Only Nige understands the British people

 

[Alanbileysfeathercut]

It's not really about that. It's about whether something is affordable when the fundamental conditions that existed when it was introduced are no longer there.

• People live around 20 years longer than they did when it was introduced (and aren't always living in good health so require higher state spending in their dotage - see a later point). Thus, the amount doled out per person is much greater.
• Demographically, the Baby Boomer generation is very large, so there are a lot of people living a lot longer, thus the total amount doled out is much greater.
• Also demographically, there are far fewer people of working age per retiree now. I think the ratio is around 2, whereas it was around 6 when the pension was introduced. As hopefully everyone knows, your pension is paid for by the taxes of working people, so this shift is very important.
• Government finances are in a mess. There has been a budget deficit pretty much every year for the last 30 years, so no government in living memory has really "lived within its means". As a result, debt repayments now are a huge slice of the annual budget.
• As a result, despite taxation being a higher percentage of GDP than any time since the war, the government is unable to do pretty basic things because increasing amounts are spent on things like pensions and debt repayment.

Of course, nothing really changes as people kick up a merry stink whenever things are proposed that are perfectly reasonable, like adjusting the retirement age to life expectancy, or means testing the winter fuel payment (did tens of thousands of pensioners actually die this winter because of the changes, as was predicted by some?), so the can is proverbially kicked down the road.

It's an odd thing this folk living 20 years longer.
A lot of folk I knew didn't reach 60,and certainly not 90( based on the 3 score and 10 adage)
Also the pension pots being eaten up by care homes for some poor buggers I know is frightening.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

It's an odd thing this folk living 20 years longer.
A lot of folk I knew didn't reach 60,and certainly not 90( based on the 3 score and 10 adage)
Also the pension pots being eaten up by care homes for some poor buggers I know is frightening.

Well yes, that's obviously another thing. There's age in good health and age. Healthy life expectancy is often around 10 years lower than life expectancy. In an ideal world, the NHS would transition to a more preventative service that is concerned with keeping people well, but it's not only a huge behemoth to change but it also doesn't really have either the spare money or spare capacity to make that change when it can't really do what it aims to do now.