Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Thread gallery
10
frozendaisy · 19/05/2026 17:41

They will raise the age before they means test.

There would be utter uproar if those that list in the most tax for years receive nothing

Gen X is a considerably smaller population than the boomers.

If you can afford it start a pension for your kids, it has decades to grow.

Lougle · 19/05/2026 17:39

hattie43 · 19/05/2026 17:31

Pensions is a ticking time bomb . People are either not saving or not saving enough so will expect to rely on pension credits . Except there won’t be a
enough people of working age to pay for it .

Especially as LGPS now offers a 50% contribution scheme because people can't afford to make full contributions. I expect they won't be realising the impact it will be having on their future pension.

Backedoffhackedoff · 19/05/2026 17:38

FernFaery · 19/05/2026 17:34

If the two are not linked what’s the incentive?

The incentive to have a job for 50 years?

self development
learning and passion
interest
using education and qualifications as intended
meeting people you can learn from
meeting people to expand your social circle
self respect and satisfaction
sense of purpose
earning a monthly income to buy a house/ car /go on holiday
earning monthly income to meet your monthly expenses

and on and on… can you really not imagine why People have jobs or careers?!

Lougle · 19/05/2026 17:35

FernFaery · 19/05/2026 17:30

Does that include those in the group with no expectation to find work?

Economic inactivity (out of work and not looking for work) sits at 21% Vs the 21.6% of 2016.

The big shift is the youth unemployment (higher) and I presume that as the figures are broadly stable despite that, people retiring at a later age? The number of vacancies is much lower now, too.

I think this is what is ignored in the narrative. Even if every feckless wanderer took the first job available, there wouldn't be enough jobs for everyone to work. There would always be unemployment. Unless, of course, people worked less hours so the jobs could be split, but then people would moan that those people needed support because they weren't earning enough, when they could work full time.

FernFaery · 19/05/2026 17:34

Backedoffhackedoff · 19/05/2026 17:34

er? No one makes a decision whether or not they work for 50 years based on their ability to draw down state pension

If the two are not linked what’s the incentive?

OP posts:
Backedoffhackedoff · 19/05/2026 17:34

FernFaery · 19/05/2026 17:31

Well there’s just no incentive to work. How can there be, if people are vociferously arguing that those who don’t work should get exactly the same?

er? No one makes a decision whether or not they work for 50 years based on their ability to draw down state pension

RudolphTheReindeer · 19/05/2026 17:33

Lots of people can't afford to.

I'm a carer and whilst I do I work very part time and pay into my work pension it's not a lot. Luckily my state pension has been protected by the fact I get carers allowance.

crossedlines · 19/05/2026 17:33

FernFaery · 19/05/2026 17:21

Mine too. No doubt it’ll become ‘means tested’ so, as ever, the sensible among us will be no better off than those who didn’t bother because ‘why shouldn’t they have it, do you want them to starve etc’

I know some people think this but I can’t see it ever happening as people would just game the system and opt out of making their own provisions whether through occupational or private pensions. Why would anyone pay a significant chunk of their income into a pension if they’ll then lose out on the state pension- which they’re also in effect ‘paying into’ through NI contributions? I know NI doesnt go into a personal ‘pot’ but you know what I mean.) I suspect what will happen is that the state pension will just remain pretty basic and the eligibility age may rise a little, though frankly I can’t see it going much higher than the current 68 as life expectancy isn’t rising.

tbh anyone who doesn’t make provision in addition to the state pension is mad imo. And yes I know COL is impacting hugely but it really makes so much sense even to just pay a few % of income into a pension. I would absolutely not want to live on the state pension alone. It’s doable but it would be a pretty soulless existence .

IsThisEverOkay00 · 19/05/2026 17:33

It’s the middle earners in schemes where the employers are putting in minimum that are badly off, I’m one of them. We are exposed to stock market highs and lows and tax relief is limited to basic rate. Of course we are never going to save enough, even with auto enrolment.

Tax relief should be a 30% fixed rate for everyone, regardless of what rate they are on. That would help level up things.

NotTheOrdinary · 19/05/2026 17:33

FernFaery · 19/05/2026 17:31

Well there’s just no incentive to work. How can there be, if people are vociferously arguing that those who don’t work should get exactly the same?

Why are you ignoring the fact that many people who do work can't afford to save for a pension?

Backedoffhackedoff · 19/05/2026 17:32

MidnightPatrol · 19/05/2026 17:27

You've Missed the point.

Theyre saying that means testing the state pension penalises those who have bothered to save.

there are no plans to mean test state pension. There is no point trying to base a debate on something that is just an idea

FernFaery · 19/05/2026 17:31

MidnightPatrol · 19/05/2026 17:30

Ok.

But then those who do save just being means-tested out of the state pension… seems a bit unfair.

Well there’s just no incentive to work. How can there be, if people are vociferously arguing that those who don’t work should get exactly the same?

OP posts:
hattie43 · 19/05/2026 17:31

Pensions is a ticking time bomb . People are either not saving or not saving enough so will expect to rely on pension credits . Except there won’t be a
enough people of working age to pay for it .

FernFaery · 19/05/2026 17:30

Lougle · 19/05/2026 17:29

According to the National Office for Statistics, the percentage of working age people who are out of work is hovering at 4.9-5% this year. The percentage of working age people who were out of work in 2016 was 4.9-5.1%. So there's not a big change at all.

Does that include those in the group with no expectation to find work?

OP posts:
MidnightPatrol · 19/05/2026 17:30

NotTheOrdinary · 19/05/2026 17:28

It's not always the case of not bothering to save. Some people can't afford to save.

Ok.

But then those who do save just being means-tested out of the state pension… seems a bit unfair.

VeterinaryCareAssistant · 19/05/2026 17:30

I've suspended my pension payments indefinitely because I can't afford to live so I need the extra £80 a month.

Eudaimonia11 · 19/05/2026 17:29

I’ve tried so hard to keep paying into my NHS pension but it’s unaffordable. I already have 15% deducted for student loans and my rent is 51% of my take home pay so the 9.8% pension deduction is just getting me further into debt so I’m going to have to opt out of it. If housing was reasonably affordable, I’d be able to save for retirement on top of paying into my pension. Imagine that!

We’re not all feckless losers wanting to scrounge off the state in our old age. Some of us worked out backsides off to improve our financial position only for the cost of living/housing crisis to happen and make us wonder why we bothered!

redcarandthebluecarhadarace26 · 19/05/2026 17:29

SomedayIllBeSaturdayNight · 19/05/2026 17:24

The report I heard said that this is not sufficient, and we should be saving at least 10% of our income monthly.

I don’t even think I have 10% left after paying everything including food and petrol

Lougle · 19/05/2026 17:29

FernFaery · 19/05/2026 17:22

I agree but there are millions not in work and the number is rising.

According to the National Office for Statistics, the percentage of working age people who are out of work is hovering at 4.9-5% this year. The percentage of working age people who were out of work in 2016 was 4.9-5.1%. So there's not a big change at all.

Backedoffhackedoff · 19/05/2026 17:28

Does this change anything though? Is it a worsening trend?
Plenty of people have never had private pensions, they weren’t even available until relatively recently. None of my parents (early retirement age) , in laws or close family friends have private pensions, with the exception of ex teachers and police officers.

the triple lock is completely unsustainable though

Brahumbug · 19/05/2026 17:28

SomedayIllBeSaturdayNight · 19/05/2026 17:24

The report I heard said that this is not sufficient, and we should be saving at least 10% of our income monthly.

The current workplace pension is insufficient. We need a bigger contribution from both employer and employee.

NotTheOrdinary · 19/05/2026 17:28

MidnightPatrol · 19/05/2026 17:27

You've Missed the point.

Theyre saying that means testing the state pension penalises those who have bothered to save.

It's not always the case of not bothering to save. Some people can't afford to save.

FernFaery · 19/05/2026 17:27

yellowhatonacapybara · 19/05/2026 17:26

The big problem for the self-employed (and I am one of them) is that given my income fluctuates significantly and I need to put aside money to live during the times I have lower incomings, locking money away, even with the tax benefits, feels like a very bad idea.

So you can’t afford to be self employed? Should you be looking for a job with a workplace pension?

OP posts:
FernFaery · 19/05/2026 17:27

SomedayIllBeSaturdayNight · 19/05/2026 17:25

What do you mean? What do you think should happen to those in poverty when they retire?

I have no idea, it’s up to them what they do.

OP posts:
MidnightPatrol · 19/05/2026 17:27

SomedayIllBeSaturdayNight · 19/05/2026 17:25

What do you mean? What do you think should happen to those in poverty when they retire?

You've Missed the point.

Theyre saying that means testing the state pension penalises those who have bothered to save.