Page 2 | To think pensions need huge reform?

aburrsir · 2026-08-12T12:32:38+00:00

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?

foxychox · 13/08/2026 13:34

Leave the state pension alone, instead look to bring public service pensions more in line with the private sector

HJC88 · 13/08/2026 13:31

Lavender14 · 12/08/2026 15:58

All of these things work in a circle though.

If people work much longer then that has a knock on effect on the younger work force who then cannot get jobs, it has an impact on the parents who rely on grandparents to provide elements of childcare who would then have to pay for expensive formal childcare.

It has an impact on the health and safety considerations of workplaces. Increased sick leave as age naturally wears on the body would also affect employers. If you have too much sick leave then in many jobs you'll be made redundant so there's a balance to be struck between rewarding people for a long career and then punishing them at the end of it when their body just can't sustain the work any longer. Would you want to be out job hunting at 70?

It also has a very significant impact on the individual if your job is not really suitable for doing into later life such as very physical work. For example I work with highly volatile individuals- could I still be doing that at 75? Probably not. So certain career pathways would see an exodus of otherwise skilled and competent workers because they can't stay in that job long term.

The other impact of this op is that we NEED people in minimum wage and low earning jobs. Society literally would not function without them. It's all well and good saying people 'shouldn't' have a mortgage or big bills when they're elderly but the reality is that life is much messier than that. And a huge percentage of the population are not going to be in a position to pay big amounts into a private pension unless their wages increase substantially.

People get divorced, partners die, people end up ill for long periods, houses require significant repairs to be done etc that mean people find themselves needing to extend their mortgage period or simply not having the ability to save for long periods. Pensioners also need to run a car for example. This proposal of yours also is not rural proofed. It would have a significant impact on elderly in rural communities who are already more vulnerable. Never mind elderly who are actually carers for their disabled/ill children.

If you increase the age of pension and older people struggle more financially then you also have the perfect recipe for increased pressure on an already struggling healthcare system. It's important that pensioners can heat their homes, connect with others, move around and eat well because they're at increased vulnerability for ill health due to their age. Take away the safety net and more people will be leaning on healthcare services where before they were resourced to manage that independently.

I agree with this. I started a personal pension when I was 24 and that was quite unusual back then. Eventually I got a workplace pension (again voluntary) and started paying into that but I left my little pension running without any input. It's now been going for nearly 40 years and it's about £100k. Well, I didn't put in a tenth of that over the years but the accumulation has been wonderful. I also have the workplace pension but these two pensions will only net me about £10-11k a year as an annuity and I am relying on the state pension as well at 67 to give us enough to enjoy our retirement.

Today workplace pensions are mandatory which is good and either the system you proposed (invested lump sum) or an NI reduction with the extra money being paid into the worker'S private/workplace pension could be a solution going forwards.

Please though, stop bashing the pensioners. We did work and pay for decades for our right to a pension. If there was no right to a state pension we should have been told when we were starting out, we'd have done things differently because we may be old but we're not stupid.

Lifelover16 · 13/08/2026 13:07

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.

Once you are frail you’ll need a lot more than £200 a week! More spent on heating, carers, home assistance, taxis to hospital, doctors, ready meals etc etc

Phineyj · 13/08/2026 13:04

This chart goes back to the financial crisis and shows incapacity (non pensioner) is rising fastest.

I'll see what I can find going further back, although the categories may not be comparable.

Sharptonguedwoman · 13/08/2026 12:57

IzzyGone · 13/08/2026 09:03

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.

as older pensioners are most likely to vote out of all the demographic and there are 1 in 4 old people, it’s important a political party keeps them on side

but altering the pension age won’t effect retired people, but workers yet to retire - but they need time to do so.

allready people born sfter 1976 are looking at having changes, but that won’t happen until 2040

you can’t change prior to this, you’ll not get people already nearing retirement that started work with a 60 or 65 retirement age voting to retire later again

someone born in 1960 has already had the age changed, in some. Cases by 7 years

Yes we have. If pension changes need to be made (not convinced) they need to start at age 21 to give people a chance to sort themselves out. Not all are financially literate about private pensions and there'll need to be a substantial safety net for those who didn't set up a pension for all sorts of reasons.

Sharptonguedwoman · 13/08/2026 12:53

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.

Oh my goodness. Have you not realised that some pensioners still rent? Some are council tenants but many are not. You need to look at a much broader range of pensioners than those near you. Some do live the high life, for sure but others absolutely scrape by. A glance at a FB group called Shoestring retirement might help.

Phineyj · 13/08/2026 12:26

Aidezmo · 13/08/2026 10:01

Not to me. She said “Welfare spending as a percentage of GDP has remained more or less unchanged over the last 50 years” so how does that fit with it doubling since the 60s and probably quadrupling since the 40s?

Show quote history

I haven't read the last 50 posts, but these two things are not the same:

Welfare spending in total
Welfare spending as a % of GDP

GDP has increased significantly over the time period mentioned, both in nominal (£) and real (adjusted for inflation) terms.

Zuve · 13/08/2026 10:09

I worked full time in a busy supermarket until 65. Then part time for another ten years. I feel great, happy, now not working, I take no meds. Yes keeping busy has helped me. Compared to many folk who retire much earlier, going earlier didn't help their health or mind.
Given a health issue then they should go, yes.

Aidezmo · 13/08/2026 10:01

BIossomtoes · 13/08/2026 07:42

I expect it’s probably about four times more than in the 1940s, how far do you want to go back? It’s abundantly obvious what they’re “on about”.

Show quote history

Not to me. She said “Welfare spending as a percentage of GDP has remained more or less unchanged over the last 50 years” so how does that fit with it doubling since the 60s and probably quadrupling since the 40s?

UltimateSloth · 13/08/2026 09:51

I suspect the pension bill will not be such a big issue after the current generation of pensioners have died. The generations underneath them don't appear to be as long lived. Incidents of cancer in young people is rising.

dreamingofgoodhair · 13/08/2026 09:03

Melograno · 13/08/2026 08:41

Absolute nonsense
Special classes NHS retired at 55 -60 in the 95 section -70 year olds 😂
Begged to come back or do R&R during Covid because so many staff left the NHS and there was zero budget for upskilling
People retired as soon as they could as it was so stressful

There are no jobs for NQ because so many have been made redundant and posts slashed
If anyone left they simply no longer recruit
Whole teams gone and so that speciality is no longer offered .

Do you think a NQ can do the work of an experienced specialist with years of training?
Those left are doing the job of 3-4 people
Do get your facts right and stop ageist clap trap

Show quote history

Absolutely right.

IzzyGone · 13/08/2026 09:03

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.

as older pensioners are most likely to vote out of all the demographic and there are 1 in 4 old people, it’s important a political party keeps them on side

but altering the pension age won’t effect retired people, but workers yet to retire - but they need time to do so.

allready people born sfter 1976 are looking at having changes, but that won’t happen until 2040

you can’t change prior to this, you’ll not get people already nearing retirement that started work with a 60 or 65 retirement age voting to retire later again

someone born in 1960 has already had the age changed, in some. Cases by 7 years

Dontcallmescarface · 13/08/2026 09:00

I think the retirement age should be staggard depending on the job. The more physical the job the earlier the retirement age, likewise any job involving driving should result in a lower retirement age.

Bonnica · 13/08/2026 08:56

sugarandcyanide · 13/08/2026 07:42

A lot of current pensioners had very good workplace pension schemes. These are rare now and the auto enrolment total contribution rate is only 8% so future pensioners won't be living the high life.

You can't live comfortably on state pension only, particularly if you're renting or still have a mortgage but also because of the cost of living many people are in a catch 22 where they can't afford to pay more in. Today's youngsters are screwed.

I'm not working full time until retirement age. I'm already exhausted and there's more to life.

It's not good for companies either to have people who are ready to retire struggling on. They're more likely to have health issues and sickness and if they've lost all desire to work they're not likely to be hugely productive either.

You are most likely right ref the public sector and other large companies that ran final salary schemes that became unaffordable and so gradually closed. I was in one for a few short years. Would be amazing to have one of those!!!

But many current pensioners didn’t have decent pension availability. Especially those of us women with “ ordinary jobs”. Again like me I started work in the seventies and my company did not have any pension scheme on offer. I was over 30 before the company I worked for offered a pension scheme to all its staff no matter their job. Yes no doubt there was private provision I could have joined but quite honestly pensions weren’t any sort of topic of focus or conversation. Mind you - despite the rhetoric - all my pay was used up each month on basics so I didn’t have any spare cash. No cash either for holidays etc or several years either we weren’t awash with money to spend. Consequently nothing went into any private pension for over 13 years work life.

Also many women had little or no protection in the workplace when becoming pregnant so the pensioners of today didn’t all have gilded lives but often breaks in employment and nowhere near equal pay etc. which all affected private pension possibilities.

Im past retirement age but still work albeit not full time as the company pensions I have are a bit rubbish. It’s shocking how low they can be! I am definitely not giving my employer the best, I am knackered! and I just don’t think humans today are really meant to work later and later. I also pay tax as pension - unlike many benefits -Is counted as taxable income. Which I think is fair enough. And no matter how it is described formally ( a benefit) I disagree, and separating pensions from “true” benefits would reduce the ageist, deafening, pensioner bashing that feels incessant currently.

Melograno · 13/08/2026 08:52

WTAF
So we have gone a full 360 from " how dare they retire" to " blocking jobs from the young"

Couldnt make it up!

HermioneWeasley · 13/08/2026 08:50

T0mbell · 13/08/2026 08:09

But the reality is most haven’t enough private pension to survive on, many will still have mortgages so they will need to stay in work which blocks off the young from jobs.

Show quote history

Indeed. But those who do have sufficient private pensions or want to use them to retire early and bridge until state pension age should be free to do so

Melograno · 13/08/2026 08:41

LancashireButterPie · 13/08/2026 08:11

Retire and return in the NHS needs to be re thought out. I know loads of HCPs who have retired and come back promising that they have valuable experience to share.
The reality is that they just cannot work as hard in their 70s, they are often off sick and a lot of their practice is outdated.
IME they are often a huge distraction, they are working for the social side, rather than to achieve.
Equally important, they are blocking jobs from newly qualified staff. 500 new nurses in Wales cannot find work.

Absolute nonsense
Special classes NHS retired at 55 -60 in the 95 section -70 year olds 😂
Begged to come back or do R&R during Covid because so many staff left the NHS and there was zero budget for upskilling
People retired as soon as they could as it was so stressful

There are no jobs for NQ because so many have been made redundant and posts slashed
If anyone left they simply no longer recruit
Whole teams gone and so that speciality is no longer offered .

Do you think a NQ can do the work of an experienced specialist with years of training?
Those left are doing the job of 3-4 people
Do get your facts right and stop ageist clap trap

double0seven · 13/08/2026 08:28

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.

Best post I've read on Mumsnet recently.

LancashireButterPie · 13/08/2026 08:11

Retire and return in the NHS needs to be re thought out. I know loads of HCPs who have retired and come back promising that they have valuable experience to share.
The reality is that they just cannot work as hard in their 70s, they are often off sick and a lot of their practice is outdated.
IME they are often a huge distraction, they are working for the social side, rather than to achieve.
Equally important, they are blocking jobs from newly qualified staff. 500 new nurses in Wales cannot find work.

T0mbell · 13/08/2026 08:09

HermioneWeasley · 13/08/2026 07:24

Sort of. But access to private pensions is usually limited to 10 years before state retirement age so that would need reform

Show quote history

But the reality is most haven’t enough private pension to survive on, many will still have mortgages so they will need to stay in work which blocks off the young from jobs.

sugarandcyanide · 13/08/2026 07:42

A lot of current pensioners had very good workplace pension schemes. These are rare now and the auto enrolment total contribution rate is only 8% so future pensioners won't be living the high life.

You can't live comfortably on state pension only, particularly if you're renting or still have a mortgage but also because of the cost of living many people are in a catch 22 where they can't afford to pay more in. Today's youngsters are screwed.

I'm not working full time until retirement age. I'm already exhausted and there's more to life.

It's not good for companies either to have people who are ready to retire struggling on. They're more likely to have health issues and sickness and if they've lost all desire to work they're not likely to be hugely productive either.

BIossomtoes · 13/08/2026 07:42

Aidezmo · 13/08/2026 07:19

Compared to the 1960s welfare including pensions is almost twice as large relative to GDP - so I’m not sure what you’re on about.

Show quote history

I expect it’s probably about four times more than in the 1940s, how far do you want to go back? It’s abundantly obvious what they’re “on about”.

HermioneWeasley · 13/08/2026 07:24

Pippin2017 · 12/08/2026 13:35

There's been so many of these threads recently. Nudge theory in action?
You can retire whenever you please. What you mean is you can't get your state pension until 67/68/69 etc etc.

Sort of. But access to private pensions is usually limited to 10 years before state retirement age so that would need reform

Aidezmo · 13/08/2026 07:19

spacewomangrounded · 13/08/2026 04:58

Welfare spending as a percentage of GDP has remained more or less unchanged over the last 50 years (it's consistently been between 10 and 12% of GDP since the mid 70s - it's currently forecast to be 10.6% of GDP in the 2025 to 2026 period according to government figures). We are not spending vastly more than we were at any point in the last 50 years and indeed are actually spending less than at some points in that time. And we spend a totally average amount compared to similar countries. Many countries who spend vastly more on welfare have better economies than ours. We aren't being dragged down by vast increases in welfare spending by any means at all. We are being misled on this point.

Show quote history

Compared to the 1960s welfare including pensions is almost twice as large relative to GDP - so I’m not sure what you’re on about.

Sunshineandrainbow · 13/08/2026 07:12

A higher retirement age also has a knock on effect to those younger trying to get jobs.