Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To think pensions need huge reform?

263 replies

aburrsir · 12/08/2026 13:32

With all of the recent chat over changing politicians and big ideas that don’t go anywhere, I can’t be the only one who thinks that someone needs to bite the bullet with pensions?

It’s something ridiculous like 50% of the welfare budget annually, and this is never going to go away.

IMO the government need to hike up retirement age and scrap the triple lock. There can be provisions made to go along with this to phase this in for those in genuine need (e.g. for the next 10 years those with no private pensions can get a top up to cover the transition period).

I’d rather know “look you can’t retire until 75” now than this constant “it’s 67…. now wait it’s 68…..” that never ends.

It seems that all governments are scared to do such a big change as it will piss off older people (who are the primary voting demographic) but something needs to change as this is just completely unsustainable long term.

We’re better off making these changes to ensure the state pension can continue sustainably in the long term future rather than having this attitude of “as long as I’m alright I don’t care”

We need a gov with long term planning goals and not just short term firefighting. AIBU?

OP posts:
LooseChocs · 12/08/2026 14:22

In the long run no state pension and you just save up with a private pension and retire when you want to

Naunet · 12/08/2026 14:20

Im sick to death of the government throwing tax payers money away. Billions wasted on HS2, millions wasted on the Rowanda plan, millions sent to other countries, (half of which either dont even need it, like China or arent providing the service we're paying for, like France), millions on supporting people who have never paid a penny into the system....Yet when we look to cut back, who do we look to first? Those who HAVE paid into the system all their lives. Its fucked up.

Owninterpreter · 12/08/2026 14:17

titchy · 12/08/2026 14:11

Yes I know - I’m over 55. The post I replied to suggested people should be allowed to access their workplace pensions earlier than retirement age. I was pointing out that they already can.

I think my point wasnt that you cant access it, but that its still tied to state pension age and at reduced rate. I get the reduced rate is because you claim it for longer, but if state age increases more people are going to be relying on 'retiring early'

if state pension age is 75 and I can only get a reduced rate of my own money at 65 it doesnt feel like what I signed up for as when this pension started state pension age for women was actually still 60, although it was about to change to 65. Lots of policies shifted wording for new entrants from saying a specific age like 55 to 10 years before state pension allowing the age to climb higher.

Melisand · 12/08/2026 14:16

arethereanyleftatall · 12/08/2026 13:41

Yanbu. It’s too high. They don’t (shouldn’t) have mortgages or children to pay for. And once you get too frail, you don’t need £200 a week, as you aren’t able to do anything with it. You’ve also had your whole life to contribute to a private pension. I know that sounds harsh, but what I am currently seeing around me is pensioners living the high life (I don’t know a single one who ‘can’t afford to eat’ even those on benefits only) but at the end other end, 30 year olds who aren’t starting families as they can’t afford it. I totally agree that something has to give.

Silly, ill-informed comment with a touch of ageism thrown in for good measure 🙄

hettie · 12/08/2026 14:12

aburrsir · 12/08/2026 13:42

Some people will, but some people will continue to work and thus continue to pay tax etc. The % who will claim sickness benefits etc is probably still worth making the change for the sake of the % who can carry on working

Sime big think tank modelled this and because (as a nation) we are in such poor health with many people over the age of 65 with multiple health conditions it just doesn't stack up. The sickness benefits outway the removal of the state pension.
It does need reforming but there are other ways to provide state pensions. Many countries have a contribution element over the life course. So there is minimum but you can get more if you contribute more. They also have actual funds that can than be utilised for investment (a massive problem for the uk) whereas are model relies on current tax payers.

titchy · 12/08/2026 14:11

AndnowIneedanewname · 12/08/2026 14:01

Only if you are 55. And from April 2028 it moves to 10 years below state retirement age.

Yes I know - I’m over 55. The post I replied to suggested people should be allowed to access their workplace pensions earlier than retirement age. I was pointing out that they already can.

talkingdeadscot · 12/08/2026 14:07

The pensioners who are poor will be the ones 'selfishly' keeping their council properties, of course you don't meet them. Does anyone remember that pensions have been 'reformed', several times. The last time was when the pension age jumped from 60 to 66 for women, with no compensation, and is now 67. What happened to all that money? These are 'boomers' who are affected so not only did they take everything and have million pound houses but they also lost years of their pensions.
Before the moving of the pension age there were various other 'reforms' which always seem to leave us worse off. What are the latest suggestions? Abolish pension credit? They're doing that by stealth. Raise the pension age again? Already happening. Make everyone take out private pensions? Already happening. Open poor houses for old people who didn't manage their money properly? Don't give them ideas. Honestly, what is the answer? State assisted suicide seems to be gaining traction.

KaleidoscopeSmile · 12/08/2026 14:07

BurntBroccoli · 12/08/2026 13:57

Yes same here. They are all extremely well off in my local area. Huge houses, brand new cars, trolleys full of expensive food in M & S…

BullSHIT

KaleidoscopeSmile · 12/08/2026 14:05

arethereanyleftatall · 12/08/2026 13:41

Yanbu. It’s too high. They don’t (shouldn’t) have mortgages or children to pay for. And once you get too frail, you don’t need £200 a week, as you aren’t able to do anything with it. You’ve also had your whole life to contribute to a private pension. I know that sounds harsh, but what I am currently seeing around me is pensioners living the high life (I don’t know a single one who ‘can’t afford to eat’ even those on benefits only) but at the end other end, 30 year olds who aren’t starting families as they can’t afford it. I totally agree that something has to give.

It doesn't sound "harsh", it sounds like obnoxious, ageist bullshit.

And are you fuck seeing pensioners "living the high life". You mean they're not in penury as you apparently think they deserve going by your next statement "I don't know a single one who can't afford to eat". Is that how you think they should be living?

milkhater · 12/08/2026 14:04

Also the demographics are such that there are more people who will vote for short term policies which benefit them as opposed to long term ones that will come to fruition when they are dead.

Parky04 · 12/08/2026 14:03

Blimey, no wonder my adult DC have decided not to have children! Life has become a miserable experience.

milkhater · 12/08/2026 14:03

The triple lock will go but not for today’s cohort of course & the age is 68 for young people but will likely go to 70

Nutmuncher · 12/08/2026 14:03

In the next 5/6 years work for a significant number of us will not exist and we will all live off UBI indefinitely so I’m not worrying too much about my pension which won’t be claimable for 25 years after that, by which time the concept of money and pensions will hopefully be long obsolete.

chirrupybird · 12/08/2026 14:02

Butterlover36 · 12/08/2026 13:52

Agree re. uncoupling from other pensions linked to state retirement age. Most public sector pension schemes are tied to this and it is seen as a selling point having a defined benefit pension. If the retirement age continues rising people who have diligently contributed are missing out on the flexibility and should at least be given an option of the same contribution level in a a DC scheme.

You can take a public sector pension and lump sum early at a reduced rate. Just like any other pension except the state pension.

AndnowIneedanewname · 12/08/2026 14:01

titchy · 12/08/2026 13:56

That’s already the case though - I can take my workplace pension now if I want. Confused

Only if you are 55. And from April 2028 it moves to 10 years below state retirement age.

OnlyUsername · 12/08/2026 14:01

Dontcallmescarface · 12/08/2026 13:49

So if people have to work for longer where are the jobs for the young ones going to come from?

This is my argument. Are we really going to want 75 year old security guards and HGV/bus drivers? Can people that age stand all day in retail (most companies that are not supermarkets do not allow you to sit? My dad retired at 60 from a job with a 1 hour 40 minute commute; how long is that feasible for the over-70s?

FeminaScribens · 12/08/2026 14:01

BurntBroccoli · 12/08/2026 13:57

Yes same here. They are all extremely well off in my local area. Huge houses, brand new cars, trolleys full of expensive food in M & S…

You don't see the ones who are poor because they don't go out so much and when they do they go to different places. You don't go in the library to keep warm in the winter.

FeminaScribens · 12/08/2026 14:01

BurntBroccoli · 12/08/2026 13:57

Yes same here. They are all extremely well off in my local area. Huge houses, brand new cars, trolleys full of expensive food in M & S…

You don't see the ones who are poor because they don't go out so much and when they do they go to different places. You don't go in the library to keep warm in the winter.

Octavia64 · 12/08/2026 13:59

State pension age has been going up in a planned programme for the last twenty years.

BurntBroccoli · 12/08/2026 13:57

arethereanyleftatall · 12/08/2026 13:41

Yanbu. It’s too high. They don’t (shouldn’t) have mortgages or children to pay for. And once you get too frail, you don’t need £200 a week, as you aren’t able to do anything with it. You’ve also had your whole life to contribute to a private pension. I know that sounds harsh, but what I am currently seeing around me is pensioners living the high life (I don’t know a single one who ‘can’t afford to eat’ even those on benefits only) but at the end other end, 30 year olds who aren’t starting families as they can’t afford it. I totally agree that something has to give.

Yes same here. They are all extremely well off in my local area. Huge houses, brand new cars, trolleys full of expensive food in M & S…

titchy · 12/08/2026 13:56

aburrsir · 12/08/2026 13:54

I also agree re uncoupling workplace pensions. They should be fixed to be from a set age (say 57 for arguments sake) and that this won’t change dependant on state pension. Then those who have adequate pensions can retire sooner - arguably an incentive to prepare well for retirement!

That’s already the case though - I can take my workplace pension now if I want. Confused

Passaggressfedup · 12/08/2026 13:55

Some people will, but some people will continue to work and thus continue to pay tax etc. The % who will claim sickness benefits etc is probably still worth making the change for the sake of the % who can carry on working
I'm sorry OP but I can only assume you are still quite young. People in their 60s are struggling to work. To pay valuable level of tax, most would have to work FT. Add the fact that as a nation, we are suffering with long term conditions at an earlier age, how do you expect the majority of people to be fit to work at 70?

And we are talking about a working age workforce that are more than ever claiming sickness benefits! If they are struggling to work for MH reasons at 30, do you really think they will be the people to work at 70?

What we need is working age people in work, preferably FT.

aburrsir · 12/08/2026 13:55

dudsville · 12/08/2026 13:52

Current young people are already struggling with joblessness and an inability to get on with living independently and starting families. Although they'll have in mind the dissappointment of their chances of being able to retire, it would be an awful lot to dump on them.

I appreciate what you’re saying, but with the way things are going there won’t be a state pension to receive in 30/40 years! It’s using so much money that it just isn’t sustainable, making it work long term is in everyone’s best interest

OP posts:
bigageap · 12/08/2026 13:54

aburrsir · 12/08/2026 13:42

Some people will, but some people will continue to work and thus continue to pay tax etc. The % who will claim sickness benefits etc is probably still worth making the change for the sake of the % who can carry on working

I'm shocked anyone would advocate for people basically to work until they die. What a depressing future this world holds. I say again, Most people will just quit due to ill health and claim other benefits

aburrsir · 12/08/2026 13:54

Butterlover36 · 12/08/2026 13:52

Agree re. uncoupling from other pensions linked to state retirement age. Most public sector pension schemes are tied to this and it is seen as a selling point having a defined benefit pension. If the retirement age continues rising people who have diligently contributed are missing out on the flexibility and should at least be given an option of the same contribution level in a a DC scheme.

I also agree re uncoupling workplace pensions. They should be fixed to be from a set age (say 57 for arguments sake) and that this won’t change dependant on state pension. Then those who have adequate pensions can retire sooner - arguably an incentive to prepare well for retirement!

OP posts: