State Pension

Women also could retire and claim SP 7 years earlier than now, men 2 years earlier.

Has the SP really increased significantly in real terms over the last 40 or 50 years? Triple lock is just a catch up after the link between earnings and SP was removed in the 80s.

Numbers claiming? now that really has risen but so has the UK's wealth - how do other countries manage? & with lower pension ages.

Bottom line is that people will not vote to scrap the SP and the wealthy wont accept means testing either.

Other countries state pensions are much more generous than our state pension is, and they get to retire earlier as well.

But I do think that the state pension should be means tested, but on a sliding scale and salary average. We need better rewards in place for those that DO save towards a private pension and will never claim state pension.

And I'll add that many civil service jobs are paid less because they had good pensions. The same work in the private sector attracts a higher salary.

The thing is though that many private pensions aren’t worth very much. I earn a decent salary, pay in more than the minimum contributions and my employer pays in more then their minimum contributions, and my pension is forecast to be about £10k a year. That’s a good pension when it’s added to the state pension, but take away the state pension and I will have worked hard most of my life to gain qualifications and get a higher paid job and promotions, paid in more then I needed to, to basically be left with the state pension amount. Those with private pensions worth a bit less would get theirs topped up to state pension level and therefore wouldn’t gain anything extra either. What’s the point of working hard and paying in extra if that will be the situation? I may as well take the extra money now and spend it.

This. 👍

Agree with this, all the women in my family have always worked for generations, even my great grandmother worked as a seamstress. Working class women have always worked.

@JollyPollysjolly no one knows BUT if you are risk adverse then assume SP will be reduced/means tested or age increased significantly so pay extra into private pensions.

I assume your DH is risk adverse and you are more relaxed?

But they're not available to staff in many if not all of those roles now. So yes a limited number of people were awarded them.

I disagree about 2 income houses not being common. I'm a boomer and I worked full time so did my DH and all my female friends worked full time too. We just took out a year for each DC we had. In my Mum's generation most women stayed home with young children. My Mum helped me with childcare for my DC and they went to a childminder some days when babies and to nursery when 3. There were no free childcare hours on offer. I think it's a good thing DC get them now so all DC get a similar start before school and not everyone has parents willing to help with childcare.

”It was a benefit that was awarded to a very small segment of the population.”

Not really small. Huge numbers of state employees had Final Salary pensions - even many who haven’t yet retired still have portions that are. LGPS, TPS, NHS…

I think the discussions around assisted suicide are connected to our aging population. People are living too long and needing too much care. I would expect that by the time I am elderly (if that happens), I’ll be given a quota of insect per day and then expected to shuffle off at a government appointed time.

Yes they are. Most people pay that percentage into a pension but do not receive a final salary pension. It was a benefit that was awarded to a very small segment of the population.

It may not exist in the universal benefit that we have currently. As a employer pensions are now mandatory it may move to a means tested one.

Politics of aging populations are shifting hugely, will be very interesting to see how that plays out. Baby boomers appear to be the last gen to be moving to the right as they age.

I meant what's the motivation to pay into a private pension if others that don't do this just get given pension credit to bolster their pension and the ones who paid in privately pay tax so don't end up much better off than the ones who never paid private pension get pension credit and don't pay tax on it?

Final salary pensions aren't 'awarded' they're paid in to. I paid between 6 to 8% of my salary and extra into AVCs once I paid my kids through university.

I think it will, and should, be means tested. Some people are very lucky to be awarded gold plated, final salary pensions and generous contributions from their employers. Others have had to muddle along and save a pot for themselves with little or no help from their employers. Anyone who can retire early can’t really stamp their feet and demand that they need a state pension on top. In the same way that our children can’t claim any supplementary help on their student loans, that we can’t claim child benefit, bursaries on school fees… means testing should be a very valid argument for State help on pensions too.

When the current generation of pensioners were working they were supporting far fewer pensioners and at a far lower level of pension. Those pensioners also lived shorter lives so there was less time to fund. 67 year olds now could live another 25 years.

Free childcare hours were less needed as two income houses were less common or necessary and fewer jobs required degrees so you’re comparing apples and oranges there.

The "motivation" is that taxes are compulsory, there isn't a choice not to pay them, assuming you re in work.

You’d like to exist on only pension credit?

And have spent the vast majority of your life without an income but on benefits instead?

The numbers who don't need the SP are very small, the new SP is over 11.5k and freezing thresholds means anyone with a small private pension will now be paying tax!!

So this is how it will be "affordable" just claw it back with the tax system.

Well that’s a helpful contribution 😭

Eh? People just entering state pension age now contributed the same % of their earnings as tax as younger generations.

And they and the generation above supported pensioners who retired on state pension at 60 /65.

Without any free childcare hours.

And only a minority % went to Uni so only a small % got free higher education.

In other countries people challenge the state and the government. Here we blame ‘boomers’, ‘benefit claimants’, ‘single parents’ etc. while the Gvt (any gvt) uses the infighting to slide through the latest inefficiency / devastating blow to our economy caused by bad management.

I agree with this. They did it for a reason.

I do think there will come a point where it's means tested. I think a couple with good private pensions don't necessarily "need" the state pension. So I'm not entirely against it. Issue is we all know the threshold will be low and it's the middle income people that will suffer. Not well off enough to have a decent retirement but not "poor" enough to get any help.

I retired early and manage ATM on my Teachers Pension. I'm 62 but I'll get a full state pension at 67. I've always worked full time and I've got 39 years of NICS. If I didn't I'd just be given Pension Credit which is only slightly lower than a full pension. If people are going to be given almost as much for not paying in all those years where's the motivation for future generations to pay in if you think you'll be given almost as much not paying in anything?

It'll be like everything else. The poor will get it from the government. The rich will have private pensions. Then there will be a skint group in the middle with small private pensions, entitled to no help.