To think state pension needs to be means tested , most sill claim way more than put in due to life expectancy. The current simply can't afford it anymore, it's out biggest single outlay..

[wishedforchild2016]

Aibu ?. Interested hear opinions for/against..

This!!! People often say they’ be ‘put in’ their whole life but been receiving public services for them and their dependents that cost a lot more than their contribution!
Just as when they refer to immigrants being ‘net contributors’ they conveniently leave out the ‘free’ education/health etc that is not covered by their ‘contribution’.

And we need to stop the nonsense of people only accepting a certain number of hours work because it will affect their benefits. A state system that discourages work is counter productive and benefits no-one.
This

But obviously some of us are net contributors - otherwise there wouldn't be any money to pay out to those who aren't.

The thing is, people generally behave consistently, so net contributors are likely to have also been responsible in saving for their old age. So by suggesting means-testing the state pension, you are excluding exactly those people who are funding it. And who are also funding Welfare. And everything else.

Don't you see that doesn’t work? A welfare state can only exist if it actually benefits those people who fund it. Ours has already tipped over into excessive redistribution and disincentives to work - but when you take away headline things like the state pension, people start doing the sums and realising quite how bad it is.

I actually don't think our Welfare state is sustainable or will exist it's current form in 30 years time. Means-testing the pension would speed it's demise.

I think it will be but it’ll be a painful transition. I’ve paid contributions for 20+ years and have 20 years to go to retirement. I strongly suspect I’ll be in the getting screwed over group whilst well to do people get full pension.

I do agree it needs to change. I don’t think there are easy answers though as people have an expectation that’s unsustainable. We all saw the fury over WFA imagine how triple lock removal e were will seem. Then means testing.

I do think government should possibly consider some sort of income based NI payments for pensioners, to help fund NHS.

I agree with you. As a student I was hounded by HMRC letters asking me to pay additional fixed sum to ensure my NI for those years were complete to ensure I would receive a full pension - with predicted amounts for if I didn't pay and if I did. My husband has the same. This was common for medical and architectural students, which we were, due to the long courses and work element of jt.

We both paid whatever it was at the time, and have paid what was asked of us ever since.

If we were means tested I am sure we would be excluded from any entitlement however we have paid what we have been requested to, including fixed sums and been presented with pension predictions for receiving a full pension ever since. So not easy for a Government to deny entitlement near retirement age. They will continue to do what they are doing reducing the burden by less than inflation rises to the pension amount.

No-one should be penalised for NI they didn't pay while studying full time. I got those letters and could no way pay the thousands of pounds demanded as a student. I'll still have made 45+ years of contributions though by the time I retire.

I agree. Frankly the welfare system doesn't work - it's trapping people as going back to work doesn't pay. Once you hit a certain income level it isn't worth it as it's all taxed away.

State pension is the one 'benefit' many will ever receive. If you take that away, again the difference working makes will be minimal - why bother?

I think any government would have a hard time means testing the state pension . There is already a creeping ‘ fairness’ about why people are paid a lifetime of benefits with no contribution vis a vis people who do the right things, go to work , pay their taxes and contribute to society . You can’t keep squeezing the working population so they pay more and more to fund others . State pension is one thing they have as a recognition of their efforts .

How are those who've never contributed funding their deductions then?

It will be reduced down to universal credit levels, with any assets (houses!) needing to be sold before it can be claimed. As is should be, people owning houses worth many 100 thousands should not be bankrolled by the rest of the population.
I know i’ll never get the state pension. i do not mind supporting people who are in need, but i do mind supporting someone else’s inheritance!

We then if @goldenautumnleaves25 way is to be followed need to move away from the 'council house you get is yours for life' so there's no more couple/single person rumbling about in the 3 or 4 bedroom house while families are in tiny flats or temp accommodation. And before all the there's not enough 1 bed properties!! starts, they can move to temp accommodation can they not?

The generation who started work in the 70s/80s seem very well off to me, obviously I only know my own family and people who retired from my workplace (NHS).
A lot inherited from parents, huge increase in property prices in our city in the South West, then good private or public sector pensions plus private pensions. That and they bought their houses when it was cheap and many paid off their mortgages quite young.
They’re jet setting, going out to eat 4-5 a week, helping out children with deposits and keeping beautiful homes. I think if you were just to look at this demographic you would think they don’t need it.
My generation though, on the whole we may not inherit as parents living way longer and will have to sell their homes to pay for care. We, if we did get on the property ladder, have much bigger mortgages and most only buy in their 30s/40s meaning no 20 years of being mortgage free and still working, so can save lots for retirement.
Plus there’s a lot more ill health, obesity and mental health. Less scope for career development and we’ll all be replaced by robots anyway. Honestly us millennials will need our state pension!

I’m not nearing retirement but have still paid in for the last 20 years. Even I wouldn’t be happy to be paying in for nothing and lots of people have paid in far longer. If you want to do something it has to be clear from age 18 you won’t get state pension. Not part way through your working life

Who pays for the people I support at work, who have significant learning disabilities and have never been in a position to earn a living?

Yes, it will have to be means tested. I’m not yet 50 but I doubt I will see a penny. I am a net contributor by a wide margin and the writing has been on the wall about the state pension for decades. I wouldn’t cut my nose off to spite my face by not saving anything so I HAVE to get a state pension. The only person who suffers in that scenario is me.
Is it “fair”? No, but life isn’t. What I will object to is being taxed even more, making it more and more difficult to save for my old age, particularly if there isn’t some kind of review of the current welfare system.

Rachel Reeves starts a thread!

Im nearly 60 and have already paid 44 years of contributions. If the state pension was means tested I wouldn’t qualify, but I’ve always factored receiving it into my calculations for retirement. When I started work I expected to receive state pension at 60 (now 67, which I completely agree with). I’ve saved hard all my life and paid my share, which is the right thing to do. If I’d spent all
my money and not bothered to save I’d get the state pension. How is that fair?

It’s not a savings account. It pays for societal infrastructure.

Well, exactly. In the UK the higher earners are already penalised compared to elsewhere (pay more in, receive less) and the low/middle earner are advantaged. If someone needs to change, surly it is to increase low/middle earners contributions.

But Labour have a visceral hatred of the ‘rich’ regardless of the logic of the Laffer curve.

"Encourage" WTF?

Life expectancy was 69 in 1950 and retirement age for men was 65 so about four years estimated between retiring and dying. Life expectancy has now increased to close to 80 for men and over 80 for women. So now it’s 11-14 years based on a retirement age of 67.

What's changed is the cost of health care - not really that we are iller but that there is now treatment for everything - my DGPs died without ever going to hospital - thats unimaginable now. The other problem is housing (and immigration hugely increasing the population - I am talking about from when I was young in the 60s). So housing is a ridiculous price.
If AI makes health care cheaper and houses are built (not just the SE) a lot of the worry would go. My state pension is just below the personal tax free rate - so any other income is taxed.

OP, what do you mean by “encourage assisted dying”?

What is the point of working. Does the government even... exist.

"Societal infrastructure" ? We never see anything for it. There's human shit in the rivers. The trains don't really come any more. There's no doctor, dentist, no police station, there's holes in the roads. Our main road fell in, literally collapsed into a massive sinkhole, and it was like that for months and months. It never gets better it only gets worse, so in 20 years surely at this rate there'll be nothing left.

Where does the money go? They say it's all for the old people so there's nothing for me, and that when I'm old there'll be nothing for me then either. What is the point of all this working? You get nothing for it but grief. I pay into a private pension but I think it's obvious that too will be worthless when I need it, when there's no state left. The pound won't be worth anything when there's no state at all. How could it be. How much is the bolivar worth these days.

Maybe we should just burn it all down. (Please don't arrest me, speech police, this is not incitement to violence it's a common rhetorical flourish)

There's no future in this country.