To think pensions need huge reform?

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.

Since the introduction of the triple lock in April 2011, prices (CPI) have increased 60%, average wages have increased 66%, and the triple lock has resulted in pensions increasing 89%. This is despite the triple lock being suspended in 2022-23 when the recovery from Covid meant wages increased by an exceptional 8.4%, but pensions were increased by the inflation rate of 3.1% instead.

The triple lock as it is currently formulated is unaffordable.

And they pay less tax too. Only working age people pay NI!

I’d scrap NI an have a higher income tax… which would work out less for those of working age (no NI) but more for pensioners. As it’s based on income, poor pensioners won’t be penalised!

the government need to stop paying benefits to everyone who just turns up in this country , that would save a fortune .Pension age need to be reduced , the rate it’s going at youngsters nowadays will never be able to retire

I agree with you.

I’m in my fifties, no personal pension and absolutely no expectation the state pension will exist when I’m late sixties/early seventies. What I would like is an assurance the economy won’t be absolutely fucked and there wil still be jobs available for me to do in the next fifteen years, and if someone could organise an assisted dying program I could use when I’m too ill/old to work I’d happily use it and not be a burden on the state. Thank you 👍👋

How about those that are type 2 diabetic and get that medication plus all their other prescriptions free!! Surely many of them could pay too..

Why is that condition exempt yet people with asthma still have to pay... 😡

Must be something to do with likely hospital admission and knock on effect of someone not taking diabetic meds but surely that's the same for asthma.

And once you get too frail, you don’t need £200 a week, as you aren’t able to do anything with it.

You still need to eat and pay council tax and utility bills. If you’re very frail you probably have to pay for other people to do the things you can no longer manage. Nobody’s living in the lap of luxury on £200 a week.

We do need to tackle the issue of companies evading their taxes, yes, but we also need to identify ways to cut benefits that are going to people who don’t genuinely need them. The two things are not mutually exclusive.

I agree. The vast majority of over 60s do not need free prescriptions.
An NHS Prescription Prepayment Certificate costs £114 a year so even if someone is getting multiple prescriptions they’re still affordable for most people.

And introduce a leaver tax!

Isn't it sad that when we feel squeezed it's always the same people who come into the firing line - the ill/disabled, single mothers, the pensioners, the minorities, the vulnerable.

I'd say it's funny how it's never the large scale companies who cleverly evade paying taxes properly but its not its fucking depressing.

Auto enrolment already deducts 8%, and employer/employee NI contributions an additional 23%, for basic rate tax payers. But auto enrolment only started, what, 15 years ago. So the effect of that is still building up. If you were, say, 21 when it started then you’ve still got more than 30 years before you reach state retirement age. So any further changes will take another 50 years to work though the system in full. Until then the government is lumbered with some form of state pension and some form of indexing, even if the tripple lock is watered down.

Turning the state pension into a ‘benefit’ not at entitlement built up though contributions is to try and create division where none is necessary. The real issue is successive governments inability to create an environment for growth. Because if the economy was growing at 4%, earnings at 3% and inflation at 2%, with auto enrolment or personal pension provision building up, the ‘problem’ of growing costs for state pensions goes away.

As a side note, the NHS costs roughly the same as state pensions with a bit of pension credit. But for ease let’s say it’s 50%. If you take 11.5% (being half the NI deducted) and add it to the 8% auto enrolment minimum pension contribution then you’re at roughly 20%. If you apply that to median earnings for full and part time workers of of £33k, assume a 40 year working life and stock market growth at a long term average of 7.2% you’d have a pension fund of £1.4 million.

Make that growth number 4.5% to account for inflation, and you’re at £750k in real terms, give or take. That ignores any growth in income over the period. Enough to fund a £30,000 a year pension. And that’s what people are already funding, but the state is only underwriting 40% of that today. And if they stopped fiddling around and let people plan, the 60% that has to be funded by the individual would grow, and the state could gradually fund less. But, the NI contributions that are supposed, in part, to fund pensions are being spent on current pensioners and not invested for the individuals contributing today, because that’s not how the system works. Saying that they should pay more is only one part of the picture. Most people’s contributions are already funding the state pension they are accruing.

I don’t work. Still pay tax. Same as a lot of pensioners.

I know, right almost as hilarious as thinking buying coffee and avocado toast are the reasons people can't afford to get on the property ladder.

Agreed. They need to start tackling this now and start making meaningful changes for younger people.

There are still people who think wealth and hard work are directly related.

Hilarious!

They do need a reform. I think there should be a basic level - to encourage buy-in from everybody. But they really should push people to put money into private contributory pensions.

Perhaps they should try working harder.

You know all pensioners don't own their house, yes? So a large number have rent to pay. £200 a week is shit all when the average energy bill, council tax, phone bill and water would be half of that alone.

When do they do that?!

A much better way is to offer teirs.

If you pay £1,000,000, it's a painless medical procedure.

Or you could try the free option with Barry. He's never done it before, but is keen as mustard.

You can guarantee the government will tax assisted dying too.

Increase tge retirement age, that will shaft the younger generation.
My job will be fine to work on past 67 as not exerting, but imagine roofers, builders, drivers etc... having to work till that age.

The state pension bill is high, we've all paid into the system so those that are at spa can receive a pension, with the promise we will get the same.
The government should cut all foreign aid eyc, look to stop giving OUR taxes away and concentrate on our own.

Pensions do need reform but any party who proposes it would be signing their own death warrant.

Pensioners would never forgive a party that scraps the triple lock. In fact people of all ages mostly support keeping it, largely because most younger people don’t understand it or pensions generally.

Raising the age needs at least 10 years notice to avoid another WASPI scenario, so announcing another rise would take a long time to see any financial savings.

Means testing it would be unpopular with almost everybody for the same reason as scrapping the triple lock.

Reforming pensions would not win any party any votes so they don’t touch it.