When will people realise that pensioners have paid for their state pension.

[notsafeanymore]

Every time there is a debate about the cost of living pensioners get a bashing.
And some have also paid for a private pension.
It's people who have never worked that should be targeted first.
I'm not on about the disabled. It's people who are benefit cheats and have never worked.

Well… this is the problem.

The state pension vs pension credit etc are both ‘absolute minimum amounts to survive on’ figures. So the working for 40 years to earn it has become a bit meaningless for your average and below worker.

To remove it would also be very difficult as to buy an annuity paying out this much would be ~£300k a year - which most people won’t be able to save, and even if they can it’s a very significant net negative for those made to do so.

I don’t know what the answer is really. I am not assuming a state pension as part of my longer term plan (I’m in my 30s) as I assume some means testing will be introduced at some point.

The country will bankrupt itself otherwise.

Depends whether you want them earning and paying NI, or staying home and having their NI paid by the state.
I assume someone did the maths and decided it worked.

If this is the case most of you are thinking. Maybe the government should start telling people that they need to start a private pension as they won't be getting a state one. Bring it in now for anyone under 40.
Or maybe the pensioners should just die at the age of 75.

But you don't 'pay for your pension' - you pay your NI contributions, which are loosely and historically associated with pensions (often by politicians politicking); and you pay those because they are a mandatory tax that you have no option but to pay. Yes, some people do pay specifically for extra pension on a personal level, but that isn't the main basis of the system. Even so, you still have to reach the qualifying age, however many extra contributions you may have made. My own DPs paid a lot of tax for decades that ostensibly partially went 'towards pensions', but they never lived long enough to claim a penny of it.

People pay tax that goes to the NHS - could pay millions - but are still sometimes refused the healthcare they need/want if they're deemed not to qualify. Then again, a child who has never paid any tax - who may even have parents and grandparents who never paid (income) tax - will get whatever approved healthcare they need.

A lot of pensioners have never or barely worked. in my last job I would see people turning state pension age who hadn't worked for years or very part time. I'm not counting the ones who were carers or long term ill.

Absolutely this
Sick of hearing about " greedy pensioners"
Ive worked since I was 13/14 baby sitting, paper round, holiday jobs etc

The issue we have is the mass unemployed who cant possibly work due to some random fabricated illness , perhaps we can come up with a new one " lazyitis" ?
They know the system and are milking it
Bring in a universal salary, everyone gets it, no top ups
What they dont realise though is this
Vote for pensions to be slashed, then when its your turn they will turn round and say " but you voted for this"

Turkeys and christmas ...

Yes but “strictly speaking “ isn’t an argument. We have paid for our pensions, end of.

God. All this chatter. About removing or curtailing something that is important for people to have.
Perhaps expect those in power to have the ability to manage our money better. To be able to secure the money that should be coming into the coffers. But is not. People who pay sod all in tax. Defaulters. Companies who don’t pay anywhere near as enough.
Focus on improving how the NHS manages its money. Or as it is presently, doesn’t. So much should be looked at before ‘let’s get rid of pensions’.

People who are currently 57 can’t be expected to fill a £12k hole in their retirement plans in 10 years and what would happen would be the people who hadn’t bothered at all with a private or occupational pension would be handed the state pension while the “savers” would be told they aren’t “entitled” as their planning and frugality goes against them. I agree it needs to be reformed but it needs to be for the youngest workers eg the current 16 or 18 year olds and younger - NI contributions added to an individual “pot” that they are expected to top up. A guaranteed interest rate and a predictable final amount and a more flexible retirement age. I agree with government “putting on your stamp” for maternity and dc under school age and for certain periods of sickness but not for unemployment.

@AWeeCupOfTeaAndAnIndividualFruitTrifle
Yes, I understand that there is not a pot. However, the social contract was sold to people as a pot. Many believe they have ‘paid in’ and in a lot cases don’t make other arrangements. When people ask what NI is for, they re often told pension.
This is what makes the social contract, it’s not real, it’s not legal, but it does mean a moral obligation.

This is why they need to bring in MAID, to ease the NHS and Pension bills. End the suffering of the people they will be taking the pensions off. Because it is coming.

It's very weird to see one demographic (those claiming pensions, or about to) so comprehensively rubbishing the demographic on whose shoulders the burden of paying them will rest. "Lazy young people", "on benefits and popping out kids" etc etc.

Talk about biting the hand that feeds you!

Yes, pensioners saving for their state pension was and still is sold as if you are paying in. You can even buy more years and get your forecast. They even extend the time so you can pay more in.
The idea that someone at the eleventh hour comes along and witters that well no actually, you weren’t and so you aren’t getting it would trigger the biggest most expensive legal case probably known to Britain.

The problem is that successive governments didn't fund pensions correctly. If they had been properly funded from the beginning in the same way that private pensions, local government pensions are, then we wouldn't be in this situation. A properly managed fund from the beginning was the answer. I realise that's not helpful as we can't go back in time, but politicians are supposed to be intelligent. They aren't.

I also think the idea of the 'social contract' - especially when it's designed to be multi-generationally funded - breaks down when it comes to things like university costs, which were always understood to be free for all who qualified, but then (in some parts of the UK), they suddenly weren't. There weren't even humble apologies that it supposedly just couldn't be sustained, but rather it was brought in with an angry (gaslighting imho) "Well, why should other people have to pay for your degree?".

We'll see the same thing actually with pensions whereby, once the state pension is scrapped officially, there will be at least two generations of people who are expected to pay into the 'social contract' of pensions for the tail end of the folk who receive it, but will never receive their own share back when their time comes.

But the ‘belief they have paid in and don’t make other arrangements’…. I mean, I agree this seems to be an issue, but they have their entire working life to understand it.

You have to really not be paying attention over the span of your working life, to at no point realise what the value of the current state pension is.

Bring public sector pension contributions in line with private sector schemes and that would solve the problem overnight and would leave plenty spare for other worthy causes.

Wtaf? Kill people to save money?

Pensioners are living too long, I write that as someone of 60. It was never in the original model, pensions were not costed with such a long life expectancy.

Blair massively underestimated how top up benefits would function, I think in the first year alone they cost double what they were expected to.

There are also survival rates of illness at all ages, we are just overall becoming too good at surviving with chronic conditions. I have one, I’m on meds now and have been for 6 months. Inherited cardiac issues. My cardiologist said almost no one sirvived heart attacks in the 1980”s, my Mother did. He was taking my history and was very interested that she had survived two.

Housing is the biggest issue and it risen from 10% single households to 33%. This is a mixture of pensioners living a long time, people remaining single or divorcing or just splitting up. It’s a massive societal change.

In reality means testing is is incredibly expensive and some will aways hide assets. Maybe we should do what some countries do it’s the opposite model. The amount of tax paid is linked to how much you get back, you pay more in and you get more back.

I mean, join up the dots!

The issue is how the change is made. Those who are already retired shouldn't in my view have a sudden drastic change to their income when their planning is based on receiving the state pension. They can't just go out to work again.

I am gen x and there was no auto enrolment when I started work so I have many years of working with no pension contributions. I am working hard now to try to make up for it. It is the one big plus for those who started work in 2016 or after (I am not saying there are not other challenges). My husband is older and he has only the state pension and a small private pension on top. He had no private pension until auto enrolment. I still work and he is part of a couple so it is fine, but it wouldn't be much fun for him if he were single.

What i really dislike in the current discussions about this is the "othering" of whole generations and saying they are all rich or they are all hard done by, it is more nuanced. The older generation will always hit the peak of asset accumulation just as they retire. It is important though that people can plan and know what will change in relation to pensions a long time before it happens.

I already have enough contributions to qualify for a full state pension, but that bring removed or frozen would make a massive difference to whether I could live ok or not in retirement.

See also, old age care arrrangements.

How businesses and people who don’t pay their taxes must love this conversation. Totally off the hook. Nobody chattering about coming for them. Great !
How leaders of inefficient publicly run organisations must love it too.
All fighting and arguing about the pension amongst themselves. Focus is off us ! Great. Off the hook.
Come on people.
Those who claim benefits but do not do training, work or education. Great, off the hook.
Let’s all have a pop at pensions. And ignore the above.

It's people who are benefit cheats and have never worked.

Agree, they're the ones who piss me off with the full new state pension, plus top up benefits if they successfully managed to spend or hide every last penny. And those who were abroad or worked cash in hand, then paid a pittance to then receive full benefit. Yes, yes, I know I don't want unfortunate people to starve on the streets but we do need to make sure it feels like working hard is worthwhile.

My own situation is I have not earned a full state pension, despite working for almost 40 years and paying an awful lot of tax and NI as I was a high earner. Thankfully I have private pensions but the principle is wrong.

I know state pension isn’t generous… but I find it mad that adults who have had their entire lives to plan for their retirement get soooo much more than a new mother on statutory maternity pay who may have had 6 months to plan savings for maternity at a time when they have increasing outgoings to secure housing in this economy, get essential baby items etc.

All of this feels like generational unfairness, knowing that we ourselves are unlikely to get a state pension but cost of living increases and stagnating wages means good private pensions are financially less accessible than ever