Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To think this is a real possibility in the future? (State pension)

454 replies

TheOtherBoleynSister · 25/03/2026 18:37

I am 34 and ever since I started working people have said don’t rely on there being a state pension. So I’m pretty pessimistic about it.

I honestly believe that for people under 40, the universal state pension (paid regardless of income or capital to those who have paid NI for a certain number of years) won’t exist. That there will be no qualifying ‘age’, and instead older people will be the same as the rest of the population when it comes to benefit eligibility ie. Have to be certified as too ill or physically unable to work, and get UC if income is low and savings are below £16k. In other words, being a certain age won’t entitle us to any benefit like it does now.

In this awful very bleak future, older people who can no longer work, who have savings/money above the threshold or private pensions, will need to rely solely on the money they have unless or until they get to the point where they now qualify for benefits.

Of course I don’t want this to happen, but with all the stories about the cost of pensions and the rising number of older people it feels inevitable. But the reality is many people’s private pensions won’t be nearly enough to last (but maybe they will be forced to spend them before any help), and there’s also talk in the press of some wanting to do away with ‘generous’ public sector pensions (which are not as generous as they used to be, albeit they are better than a lot of private schemes).

I am quite aware of pensions due to older relatives and friends who are of that age, but many people my age haven’t a clue about them or how they work. I do think we will be seeing a real disaster in less than 30 years, but people don’t care as it’s someone else’s/ tomorrow’s problem.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
9
Badbadbunny · 28/03/2026 13:02

MidnightMeltdown · 28/03/2026 12:43

No, it will be worse. Much, much worse.

AI is being developed to replace human beings, so that humans are no longer needed. People making all the money (e.g. big US tech) aren’t going to be paying out universal basic income.

I think we'll end up turning the clock back to "localism" where people worked, lived, etc locally, and worked doing more "crafty" things, farming, tending to animals, tending small patches of crops, etc. I.e. back towards self sufficiency. Society will be polarised, at the one end, the "high tech" richer side of things, and at the other end, a basic/subsistence level of living.

Badbadbunny · 28/03/2026 12:59

Mum2Fergus · 28/03/2026 12:29

I think with the push on workplace enrolment the SP may ultimately move to means tested. It will take forever to actually implement this though…no government will want to risk what little credibility they have left in imposing it.

All you can do really is prepare as best you can for your own financial future…if you have kids, teach them.

I think it will be means tested, but at first the threshold will be very high, meaning few people are affected, maybe something like £100k of income per year. That way there'd be relatively little moaning as so few people affected and there'd be the narrative that those with incomes over £100k don't need the state pension anyway.

Then, of course, the threshold wouldn't change, so fiscal drag would kick in drawing more people into breaching the threshold and not being eligible for state pension.

The government of the day could also start to reduce the threshold, again, on the grounds that, say, people with incomes over £70k don't need the state pension, and so it goes on.

Little and often is the way! Fiscal drag is absolutely loved by politicians, as are smaller incremental changes they hope no one notices and relatively few people care about enough to make a fuss.

MidnightMeltdown · 28/03/2026 12:43

BIossomtoes · 28/03/2026 07:25

The power dynamics will be the same as they’ve always been - the uber wealthy screwing over everyone else.

No, it will be worse. Much, much worse.

AI is being developed to replace human beings, so that humans are no longer needed. People making all the money (e.g. big US tech) aren’t going to be paying out universal basic income.

Mum2Fergus · 28/03/2026 12:29

I think with the push on workplace enrolment the SP may ultimately move to means tested. It will take forever to actually implement this though…no government will want to risk what little credibility they have left in imposing it.

All you can do really is prepare as best you can for your own financial future…if you have kids, teach them.

Badbadbunny · 28/03/2026 12:19

@ThisTicklishFatball

But the older generation of Boomers never seem to miss an opportunity to bash the young. So it's all a bit tit for tat really.

MarriedTwiceOneGrownUpDaughter · 28/03/2026 12:13

That and others. Oil exploration has been effectively stalled.

ThisTicklishFatball · 28/03/2026 12:10

I can only advise people to be mindful, stay careful, and make plans for the future that cover all kinds of scenarios, even the worst-case ones.

My husband and I have several plans, some still in theory and others already in motion, to ensure we enjoy a sustainable, fun, and healthy retirement. We’re in our 40s and prefer not to engage in the habit of blaming past generations for things they had no part in.

I can’t stand it when people blame ‘boomers’ for their own shortcomings, especially when they haven’t taken steps to prepare for a better retirement themselves. Pointing fingers at others for your actions or inactions is never a good look.

At some point, blaming past generations for current problems just becomes tiresome and feels like pure rage-bait.

It’s not hard to picture Gen Z and future generations feeling frustrated with older ones—whether Gen X or Millennials—for failing to make the country better for them. Honestly, I wouldn’t be surprised if Generation Beta ends up strongly resenting Gen Z for doing nothing. I can even imagine Mumsnet in 2040 buzzing with mothers blaming their own mothers for being useless and wrecking the country.

Badbadbunny · 28/03/2026 12:07

Swiftie1878 · 28/03/2026 10:56

You don’t think AI is going to drastically change the shape of everything, including society?!
I guess you’d have denied the Industrial Revolution as well, then?

No, but your utopia of everyone enjoying a relaxing/workfree life visiting art galleries isn't going to happen. It's a nice pipedream but completely unworkable in reality.

BIossomtoes · 28/03/2026 11:59

MarriedTwiceOneGrownUpDaughter · 28/03/2026 11:55

It could be paid out of a sovereign fun, but that could mean dumping the green agenda and using the state's oil reserves (and not privatising them!) or sharing the income from natural renewables.

This oil reserve?

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2026/mar/28/north-sea-oil-gas-licences-conservatives

Hundreds of North Sea licences granted by Conservatives have ‘so far produced only 36 days worth of gas’

Exclusive: Findings cast doubt on claims new drilling would help cut bills and boost energy security, researchers say

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2026/mar/28/north-sea-oil-gas-licences-conservatives

BIossomtoes · 28/03/2026 11:58

CloudPop · 28/03/2026 11:35

But they’ve only “paid in” a fraction of what they are going to get out. The sums just don’t add up.

Some people, true. Others will never get back what they’ve “paid in”. It’s a bit like an insurance policy - you pay in thousands over the years, some people will claim and get their money back, others might as well set fire to fivers.

MarriedTwiceOneGrownUpDaughter · 28/03/2026 11:55

User33538216 · 28/03/2026 10:43

And who pays the taxes to fund this income if no one is working?

It could be paid out of a sovereign fun, but that could mean dumping the green agenda and using the state's oil reserves (and not privatising them!) or sharing the income from natural renewables.

CloudPop · 28/03/2026 11:35

New0ay · 25/03/2026 19:39

You mean pensioners who have paid in to something their whole lives, suddenly have it removed with no warning. Not a vote winner- and ludicrous.

But they’ve only “paid in” a fraction of what they are going to get out. The sums just don’t add up.

crossedlines · 28/03/2026 11:00

Pleasealexa · 28/03/2026 10:54

It's currently challenging in the world due to Orangeman but if you compare life now to 100 years ago it's a better time to be alive.

Lives are safer for so many reasons and it is easier. Grandparents raised many more children in small houses, without all the household appliances. Online has given us all so much more time, hence why more people exercise, and have hobbies.

Jobs do exist and there are still lots of opportunities to progress. Pensions are more readily available so there is the potential to save for your future. Housing is the area that impacts most people and I think if that could be resolved, lives for young people would be better.

So true

ThisWiseBiscuit · 28/03/2026 11:00

Has anyone started quoting Farenheit 451 yet lol

Swiftie1878 · 28/03/2026 10:56

TheOtherBoleynSister · 28/03/2026 09:50

Why do you think it’s going to happen? Of course it isn’t going to happen.

You don’t think AI is going to drastically change the shape of everything, including society?!
I guess you’d have denied the Industrial Revolution as well, then?

Pleasealexa · 28/03/2026 10:54

dinbin · 28/03/2026 10:29

Tbh i’m not surprised younger people have mental health issues, the future looks very bleak.

It's currently challenging in the world due to Orangeman but if you compare life now to 100 years ago it's a better time to be alive.

Lives are safer for so many reasons and it is easier. Grandparents raised many more children in small houses, without all the household appliances. Online has given us all so much more time, hence why more people exercise, and have hobbies.

Jobs do exist and there are still lots of opportunities to progress. Pensions are more readily available so there is the potential to save for your future. Housing is the area that impacts most people and I think if that could be resolved, lives for young people would be better.

BIossomtoes · 28/03/2026 10:53

dinbin · 28/03/2026 10:42

Is that including students though?

Yes, just like the 50+ age group includes disabled people and early retirees.

dinbin · 28/03/2026 10:47

it’s fair to say a massively larger proportion of the younger generation are not working, sick with mental health issues than was ever the case with previous generations!

If 2m of the economically inactive young people are students that doesn’t leave millions not working due to mental health plus 16 & 17 yr olds have to legally be in education or training.

User33538216 · 28/03/2026 10:43

TheOtherBoleynSister · 25/03/2026 18:45

I can’t see it happening. I don’t think it would be good for society for either. What would all the people who can’t get a job do all day? Plus everyone would have less money so it would kill many industries.

And who pays the taxes to fund this income if no one is working?

dinbin · 28/03/2026 10:42

Is that including students though?

dinbin · 28/03/2026 10:41

“As of 2025, around 3.5 million people aged 50 to 64 are economically inactive, with the inactivity rate at 26.1%.”

“The primary reason, covering roughly 44.7% of economically inactive individuals in this age group is long term sickness & disability”

www.gov.uk/government/statistics/economic-labour-market-status-of-individuals-aged-50-and-over-trends-over-time-september-2025/economic-labour-market-status-of-individuals-aged-50-and-over-trends-over-time-september-2025

dinbin · 28/03/2026 10:34

@crossedlines can you link to that? And how the older cohort are supporting themselves as I have read differently?

crossedlines · 28/03/2026 10:32

dinbin · 28/03/2026 10:27

it’s fair to say a massively larger proportion of the younger generation are not working, sick with mental health issues than was ever the case with previous generations!

There are far more economically inactive people in their 50s-64s but this is skewed by raising the state pension age as more are sicker and unable to work but fall into the “working population category”.

The job market for young people has changed though. Regardless in terms of costs we having to have some kind of plan for the demographic shift.

That’s incorrect: the largest proportion of economically inactive people is the younger age group. Also, the statistics for the older age group includes those who’ve retired early by drawing the occupational or private pension they’ve paid into which skews the figures, as they not working but not drawing the state pension

dinbin · 28/03/2026 10:29

Tbh i’m not surprised younger people have mental health issues, the future looks very bleak.