State pension

Assuming you pass residency rules, the pension is means tested (based on assets- diff amounts of home owned / versus not). So I guess, on theory, you can swoop in last minute, have low assets and get full state pension ? Not sure how it works in practise.

I do know compulsory workplace pensions have been around and established for decades. So many more Australians have saved for their retirement and will be self sufficient financially.

Yes I have known to like you but that doesn’t mean I don’t need it when I turn 60. I had no idea I would have to stop work in my 50s.

If you aren't working, and have no assets, and on a full benefits package, and have the full stamp for state pension, then you will be better off I believe.

There are proportionably very few millionaires and so it’s going to make very little difference to the overall bill, in fact likely to cost more to administer it. In reality means testing previously universal benefits usually means taking them away from middle earners for whom the benefit would have been appreciated and whose inclusion made them feel the welfare system was also for them. Imagine you pay into a healthcare system all are entitled to join but if you end up needing an operation you have to pay for it unless you’re on minimum wage. Compared to a healthcare system that yes you pay into and although you get much less out as you’re healthy so maybe don’t need treatment for cancer like your friend down the road, however when you did need a knee operation you would still get it paid for or a significant discount, which one are you likely to be happier paying into? To find actually that you and the person down the road both have cancer but by the time you’ve self funded (on top of paying these huge insurance premiums that have given you nothing) you have less money left than them when you put more into the pot in the first place 🤷🏻‍♀️ it starts to get a bit ridiculous and you wonder why you're agreeing to be part of such a silly system in the first place

really?
I’m in my 60s already and have known for years that I won’t get it until 67.

You might feel differently about that when you’re 80. My lovely 93 year old neighbour had a hip replacement last year. She still drives and has amazing quality of life.
I don’t want to live in a society where we tell fit and healthy people they are too old for an operation.

I’m in my 50s fully paid in for mine. I thought I’d get it at 60 now years away. I have no income (can no longer work) and no other pension so it will be a much needed lifeline for me as I get older.

Thats what already happens with most other benefits...

It’s not just that it would be unfair, it would be financially disastrous. People won’t pay into occupational pensions, or private ones. They’ll choose to have more money in their pocket in the here and now if they know it won’t benefit them on retirement.

It’s such a reductive argument to just say ‘means test it because people who’ve made their own provision won’t need it.’ People will quickly learn to work the system to their advantage. People who are paying into their own personal pensions are also paying NI - often, a LOT. People are not going to accept ‘paying twice’ (I know NI doesn’t technically work like that but in reality people are) if they then end up with the same or less than people who don’t pay into a personal pension.

Then you have a situation where those who have done the right thing and saved into a private pension (which provides cashflow to businesses to keep people employed.....) get royally screwed so Jim, who didn't save as much, gets to keep his whole state and private pension.

How about a lifetime limit on the amount of government support you can receive? Because some people are more expensive to support than others and would make people think of it as a safety net and incentives them to use it like their own money and not some bottomless pit that others will top up.

But, when you see a pensions advisor they work out how much you need to save, based on you having a state pension as a starting point.

It seems very unfair, for someone to spend their life saving £250k to double their pension, only for that pension to be taken away.

The point where the blow would be easily absorbed enough to be palatable would have to be around an income of level 40k+, IMO. That's a pension pot of a million. What % of people have a pension pot that high?

I think they are more likely to come at it from the other end. More focus on "value for money" in NHS treatment decisions, e.g. no surgery after 80, for example. Not quite leaving old folk in the snow to die, but getting the length of a pension down regardless. I think that is inevitable.

It would have to have a slow lead in to change the rules for universal state pension. It's factored into projections for retirement planning.

The could means test it, but that sucks for those of us going to be relying on it.

Already we have a situation where those who haven't contributed enough end up with more disposable income than those who have contributed - but have no private pension. Then the other pretty woeful situation where you do have a (very small) private pension but then get taxed on it so end up the same as if you didn't have one .... And that's all at the lower levels. The same angst in the middle. Still get taxed etc

I personally think the big thing is going to be healthcare. Those in work of working age will most likely get private healthcare as a benefit. Once reach old age, the cost of that policy will be very high, so NHS will be severely stretched.

Do you know if everyone pays into the Gov pension in Australia (like our national insurance) but only some people get anything back out because it’s means tested ?

Yes I seem to remember you never actually specified who "the rich" are that shouldn't get a pension.
Not entirely sure that aligns with your triple lock above all else spiel though.

They will also need the cash when they retire.

I'm not fit and healthy though but I have to drag my arse out of bed every morning in pain because I have no other option but to provide for my family! I have absolutely no idea how I'm going to manage into my 60s doing the job I do but I don't have a choice!

In some countries it's already means tested.... Eg Australia. Not everyone there gets a government pension. Superannuation (equivalent of private UK pensions) are primary source for old age and have been for years.

Why would you pay child benefit to a millionaire?

If you're fit, healthy and intelligent enough to pay high taxes you will indeed be paying for others. You are privileged. Those that need are not. Isn't that fair? That's how society works. It's pretty depressing if you can't see why the privileged should support the underprivileged.

No. Nowhere have I said that, quite the opposite! We should take child benefit of above average earners and we should also means test the pension. If you read back through my posts you will see that I think it's ridiculous that we are paying pensions to the mega-rich.

People just dont understand the maths. There are very few billionaires in the uk or even higher wealth millionaires. Often they own wealth that is quite difficult to value/tax, or its not all in this country. When you try to tax this, it makes a lot less money than you might imagine because there just are not many of them, some are easily able to move/defer income etc to avoid it.

By contrast if you simply add 1p to the basic rate, you instantly raise about £8bn. Simply because there are millions of basic rate tax payers.

No it isn’t, you can opt out.

Which is a fantastic argument for NOT means testing. Why the hell would someone pay into a private or occupational pension if it’s going to work against them when they reach pension age?

I pay around £400 per month into an occupational pension. I do it because I want more than the state pension (which really is very basic, just about enough to live on) when I’m retirement age. If I would miss out on a state pension because the govt says, ‘hang on, you’ve already got a pension you’ve been paying into for the last 40 years as well as the NI contributions I’ve no choice to pay, then fuck that, I’ll keep my £400 a month and spend it now.

The govt introduced auto enrolment precisely because they want people to make personal provision over and above the state pension. Any govt knows it would be disastrous to means test, not just because of votes but because people will just game the system and it will be financially disastrous

I pray you are right! 🙏🏼

Yes, I wish people wouldn't even mention such things! Dint give the powers that be silly ideas!!