Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To think increasing pension age isn’t going to add up?

306 replies

Tiredandconfused23 · 03/10/2024 09:43

I was reading a few recent studies about the employment situation for over 50s, basically confirming how this age group struggles to return to work, is more likely to be laid off and/or forced into early retirement and how a far higher proportion are in poverty and/or insecure employment than other age groups. And how, despite years of pushback against age bias, it’s only increased in recent years.

If we accept this, I can’t help feeling the idea that increasing the pension age so we work longer, thus save money on benefits, isn’t going to add up. Many people in their fifties would happily carry on working - the issue is many employers may not want us. You can’t keep working if there’s no job to work at.

AIBU to think we may soon be facing a load of older people on benefits, often through no fault of trying, rather than claiming a pension? Would this be seen as still more favourable by the Government?

OP posts:
Inslopia · 03/10/2024 16:27

I don't think you understand how averages work

An awful lot of responses on here would indicate many people don’t understand averages tbf. Hence why you get all the anecdotal comments.

Inslopia · 03/10/2024 16:25

Did I miss where you acknowledged you misquoted me?!

Inslopia · 03/10/2024 16:25

The irony! 😆

BIossomtoes · 03/10/2024 16:23

Superworm24 · 03/10/2024 16:17

But we are talking about the average person. I don't think you understand how averages work. Most people are not net contributers. You personally may be.

Show quote history

Please don’t be rude, there’s no need for it. Of course I understand how averages work.

Superworm24 · 03/10/2024 16:17

BIossomtoes · 03/10/2024 16:06

I think you might find we are if you look at contributions over a lifetime. Many of us were higher rate tax payers for 20+ years while taking nothing in healthcare or education.

Show quote history

But we are talking about the average person. I don't think you understand how averages work. Most people are not net contributers. You personally may be.

BIossomtoes · 03/10/2024 16:11

DoraSpenlow · 03/10/2024 16:09

GertrudePerkinsPaperyThing

"Most “boomer” parents did one role per parent - fathers went out to work, and maybe did a bit of DIY or financial life admin, and mothers stayed at home and kept the home. Obviously not everyone did but this was very common, and an average set up. Or the Mum worker part time."

I 'm of the boomer generation and although I didn't have children I don't know of anyone amongst my friends and relatives who had that set up. I wouldn't think it was average or common at all. Only for the very well off.

It was extremely rare. It tended to be the Silent generation with that set up when men saw it as a point of pride that they could support their wife.

DoraSpenlow · 03/10/2024 16:09

GertrudePerkinsPaperyThing

"Most “boomer” parents did one role per parent - fathers went out to work, and maybe did a bit of DIY or financial life admin, and mothers stayed at home and kept the home. Obviously not everyone did but this was very common, and an average set up. Or the Mum worker part time."

I 'm of the boomer generation and although I didn't have children I don't know of anyone amongst my friends and relatives who had that set up. I wouldn't think it was average or common at all. Only for the very well off.

BIossomtoes · 03/10/2024 16:06

ImNunTheWiser · 03/10/2024 15:51

If you’re talking about the Baby Boomer generation, then on average they are not net contributors, no.

Show quote history

I think you might find we are if you look at contributions over a lifetime. Many of us were higher rate tax payers for 20+ years while taking nothing in healthcare or education.

Reugny · 03/10/2024 16:03

SmileyHappyPeopleInTheSun · 03/10/2024 15:57

Aren't we the most likely to be affected as workers now paying higher tax - and when we get older being one who face higher retirement ages and lower benefits?

A few boomers have been caught by higher pension ages - especially some women and I agree it's not been fair but if retirement ages keep creeping up what they hell will they be in 20-30 years time and where will we all be trying to finding work in our 70s.

Edited
Show quote history

The boomers who were caught up in the higher retirement ages were just unlucky in the fact that the governments from 1980 onwards who knew there was a demographic time bomb kicked the can down the road.

SmileyHappyPeopleInTheSun · 03/10/2024 15:57

Inslopia · 03/10/2024 15:06

Do all gen X and millenials on here realise that in about 20-30 years you are going to take over as the most hated generation of all time?

So we shouldn’t discuss an ageing population because of this?

Aren't we the most likely to be affected as workers now paying higher tax - and when we get older being one who face higher retirement ages and lower benefits?

A few boomers have been caught by higher pension ages - especially some women and I agree it's not been fair but if retirement ages keep creeping up what they hell will they be in 20-30 years time and where will we all be trying to finding work in our 70s.

ImNunTheWiser · 03/10/2024 15:51

BIossomtoes · 03/10/2024 13:46

Paying your share is paying everything expected of you throughout your working life based on your tax liability. I’d lay money on most people covering what they take out. The working life of today’s retirees spans roughly 50 years in most cases. Between income tax (which was over 30% basic rate when most of them started work), NI, VAT, stamp duty, fuel tax and council tax, they’re pretty certain to have paid their share. Add in that a high proportion continue to pay income tax in retirement, along with all the other taxes apart from NI.

Show quote history

If you’re talking about the Baby Boomer generation, then on average they are not net contributors, no.

Reugny · 03/10/2024 15:42

Teateaandmoretea · 03/10/2024 15:32

It is true - as you say the maximum savings is 16k, that isn’t a lot.

Show quote history

The saving amounts for benefits have stayed the same since they have been introduced.

Reugny · 03/10/2024 15:40

BIossomtoes · 03/10/2024 15:00

So true. Particularly those who inherit their boomer parents’ ill gotten gains.

Show quote history

Lots of Gen X don't have boomer parents. 😉

Not everyone has children young, and actually this is becoming more of an issue due to the lack of affordable housing meaning that people are having less children due to having children later.

Teateaandmoretea · 03/10/2024 15:32

LostittoBostik · 03/10/2024 15:06

also not true - you can have £16k in cash savings (not including pension) and still apply for UC

Show quote history

It is true - as you say the maximum savings is 16k, that isn’t a lot.

GertrudePerkinsPaperyThing · 03/10/2024 15:27

Tiredandconfused23 · 03/10/2024 15:25

Just don’t mention Liz Truss… 😬

Show quote history

Ok ignore everything I said!

Original poster
Tiredandconfused23 · 03/10/2024 15:25

GertrudePerkinsPaperyThing · 03/10/2024 15:16

Oh he seems older! 😂

Thats a very black mark for us as he was such a fool

Edited
Show quote history

Just don’t mention Liz Truss… 😬

OP posts:
BooseysMom · 03/10/2024 15:20

mummymeister · 03/10/2024 12:30

I think the hope from successive governments is that we will reach some sort of tipping point where there are so many over 50s looking for work that the employment situation for them will have to improve in order for the jobs that need doing to still get done. the pension age is way too low in my opinion. when it first came in the average life span for a man was 66 (so one year above the pension age) and 71 for women. it was never intended for people to stay on the pension for years and years as they do now.

What's the point of a pension then if you can't stay on it for a good number of years?

godmum56 · 03/10/2024 15:19

Dwappy · 03/10/2024 11:00

Yeah getting rid of state pension for all and means testing it when you've been told all your life to ensure you pay in enough to get it and then having it taken away won't go down well.
It's bad enough that even if you don't, you just get pension credit. I was always taught by my parents I needed to work to get enough years to get my pension. But it seems that even if you don't, you just get pension credit instead which gives you the same as pension.
Unless people are very well paid, most people won't have enough for retirement if they take away state pension as they've been budgeting for it.

some of us have already been lied to regarding the change to pension age. We were told one thing for most of our working lives then told another.

GertrudePerkinsPaperyThing · 03/10/2024 15:16

BlackShuck3 · 03/10/2024 15:14

@GertrudePerkinsPaperyThing surely David Cameron is gen X?

Oh he seems older! 😂

Thats a very black mark for us as he was such a fool

Ariela · 03/10/2024 15:16

I got current job by NOT putting my age on the application, and shuffling previous work to a paragraph eg 'After a career in q field.....where my skills included x, y, z etc etc'. Directors were a bit taken aback when they realised I'm a good 10 years+ older than they thought - but they value my experience and all is good.

BlackShuck3 · 03/10/2024 15:14

@GertrudePerkinsPaperyThing surely David Cameron is gen X?

BlackShuck3 · 03/10/2024 15:11

LostittoBostik · 03/10/2024 15:06

also not true - you can have £16k in cash savings (not including pension) and still apply for UC

Show quote history

How long before you can only get UC if your assets are under a certain value and you have to accept cameras in your house (or some other kind of monitoring) to prove that you aren't hiding anything?

GertrudePerkinsPaperyThing · 03/10/2024 15:09

Dwappy · 03/10/2024 14:59

Do all gen X and millenials on here realise that in about 20-30 years you are going to take over as the most hated generation of all time? Once the boomers are all dead and forgotten about it will all be your fault. You'll be seen as the lucky ones who ruined it for everyone else.

Well, we’ll see. It depends what we do now that we are beginning to see Gen X and Millenial leaders of countries - alongside some younger boomers who seem like Gen X (Starmer, Harris if she gets in etc)

We haven’t actually had a Gen X PM of the UK yet - we’ve just got from boomers, to Sunak who is a millennial, back to a boomer again (although I think Starmer acts like one of “us”)

Inslopia · 03/10/2024 15:09

@MonkeyToHeaven When you put it like that I think it will be even harder to convince society to improve things for others!

BlackShuck3 · 03/10/2024 15:08

Tiredandconfused23 · 03/10/2024 14:57

There are too many people, with too self-interested a viewpoint, for Universal Income to become a thing easily. If it does, it will be amidst much kicking and screaming. Not just from corporate elites either - you only have to look at the perennial complaints from a substantial portion of the population against those receiving benefits or seeking asylum getting, in their view, something for nothing.

Show quote history

What about a version of UBI where you got a basic income for doing a certain amount of menial work every week? When I say menial work I mean work that no one else wants to do and where the employers find it difficult to recruit.

Swipe left for the next trending thread