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 maybe we should follow the European method, but in this country people don’t want those systems. Many will avoid paying tax - just look at (the unfair I agree) cliff edges for higher tax, many higher earners will just stick it all in their pension or salary sacrifice to bring them into a lower band of tax (and that can give them eligibility to child benefit too which is up to 60k - I’d argue 60k is a lot to receive a means tested benefit). Believe it or not though I’ve said that I think there should be subsidised child care for all women who work and yes I agree the Nordic type models of higher tax and more social benefit are good. But voters here will not vote for higher taxes.

The state pension itself should not be labelled a benefit. It is what society pays when you get old and can’t work any more. That’s all. Pension benefits should be separated out to those who haven’t contributed and thus receive pension credits and other things. I agree it’s wrong that my friend who has worked since 16 has a smaller pension income than another who has worked sporadically all her life.

Current pensioners didn't pay enough in. That's one of the reasons why we have such a large national debt.

Not all pensioners are rich. So lumping all pensions together as rich is a gross generalisation. But a considerable proportion of them are rich. Really rich.

The middle class pensioner group is one of the richest groups in society with large private pension wealth and benefits as well as significant housing wealth.

We need to implement progressive taxation that taxes the richest pensioners. Taxing the poorest is pointless because they have no money.

Personally I am in favour of increasing inheritance tax considerably to recover the money that went on the national debt instead of taxes. This would also flatten the wealth distribution more, as money flows to people who work for it rather than just those that inherit it.

Unfortunately any attempt to progressively tax rich pensioners more, be it through inheritance tax, property taxes, income tax or making them pay more for end of life care or reduce benefits like the triple lock or WFA are usually met with howls of protest.

We really need a leader that is going to step up to the plate and increase the taxation on the richest in society, while putting forward the message that it is the richest that are going to bear the burden and not the poorest of that demographic.

That was a very different era though agd can’t be compared to what what’s happening now (or even with our parents)

With a dwindling job market to boot.

I suppose I could ask: When will it occur to people to check out whether the things they believe which cause them agitation are actually correct?

Fucking Robert Maxwell didn't help the Gen X pension situation. I was too unsure about how to save up for years in case it was stolen. It took until my late 30's and a reputable employer linked to a decent pension fund for me to start contributing.

Ive worked all my life and built a decent pension. Why should I have to pay for someone else that didn’t build their pension and went on holidays whilst I missed out?

So that would be the armed forces, the NHS, teachers, and the Civil service. Local government schemes are fully funded.

If you take more out of the system (as some pensioners do) than you paid in (plus it's interest) then you are in receipt of a benefit. Whether it's a pension, or just plain old healthcare.

Deal with it.

Indeed you cannot have it both ways.

It’s unfair to change the terms after the event for public sector workers, and for the state pension. If we are going to renege on state pensions because needs must, then the same logic applies to public sector pensions. Which make up for salary differentials by far. It’s not even the case that public sector workers are paid less than private sector workers.

https://careermetrics.co.uk/blog/public-vs-private-sector-pay/

Once you go back on contracts, legal or social, it gets chaotic and everything is on the table.

There are controlled ways to make adjustments, like the state pension age going up with forward notice, closing final salary schemes and rolling everyone onto DB, etc.

Or here's a novel thought, they could pay for their own childcare for their own children that they chose to have the same as people who are drawing pensions now had to do.
No free childcare, and six weeks paid maternity leave. What a life of luxury we lived.

Maybe not, but you CAN compare how much is paid and the pensioner expected to live on.

I agree and am in the same position. When the welfare state was set up I think the average time in retirement was about 5 years so was affordable. It is usually far longer than that now so is economically unsustainable but that is not the fault of pensioners.

I think it’s time to do away with ALL final salary pension schemes but the government must ensure that pension levels mean you can live safely in retirement. After that amount of money is mandatorily taken from salary if you want more for your retirement then you set up your own personal one.
The current situation where MPs, NHS workers, Civil Servants and Local Government staff (but not teachers) and others have gold
plated pensions is unsustainable and means that there is no real appetite for change in Westminster. Retirement, for those who have worked and contributed, should be a level playing field instead of the current lottery.

But again it’s current pensioners benefiting from the best of these schemes as they arr far less generous to newer entrants.

I don't actually disagree with this, but why would it be fair to change that 'overnight' but not to make any changes to the state pension because people have planned for it etc.? Public sector pensions have changed over the years - I have one and my terms are much less generous than if I'd joined the same scheme before 2008 - I also think further cuts are inevitable and probably justified, but that there would need to be some staging.

This is a tricky one, because in theory, if those pensioners had put their contributions into a high yield account and watched them grow (like with a private pension), then yes, those contributions would've been a nice, tidy pot by the time they retire, at least for the ones who were working in well-paid jobs. But that's not the case, because payments made in the past were immediately paid out for public services and govt borrowing of the time. So pensions now are being paid for with contributions now, i.e. the taxes that the working population contribute every month from their pay cheques. And in most cases, the pensioners of today never paid in anywhere near what they're drawing out.

My DM, for instance, only worked and paid NI from 1967-1973. Pre-decimalisation in 1970 she was earning something like £5 a week. So how much do you think she paid into the NI pot in her six years of working? She's been retired for 18 years already and draws the basic state pension of £184.90 per week. In other words, over 18 years, she has already drawn out over £170k. Do you think her contributions touched the sides of that? Of course they didn't. And while an annual salary of £9,614.80 isn't exactly generous, it's a hell of a lot of money to be paying out to each and every person over pension age, many of whom never paid anything or very much in.

Sure, let’s remove national insurance then too so that I can save for my own pension and not fund yours. Perhaps to make up the shortfall those currently drawing their state pension should be forced to sell their assets first to fund retirement.

They had to make a special law just for Kier Starmer to maintain his amazing pension. One rule for them, another rule for us.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2013/2588/contents/made

State pensioners have not paid for their pension. They have paid for their parents’ pension, who had a much shorter lifespan. The current pensioners as a group are very much the winners of the system.
Pension was meant to cover you for your last years, when you are unable to work, not for a nice relaxed retirement. The current pensioners are probably the only generation who will enjoy the luxury of not having to work when they are still reasonably fit - future (and previous) generations will work until they drop, or will have to create a private pension.
The current generation will absolutely not get anything back, the numbers don’t add up!

Correct OP. The voice of reason.

They arent. It was in an official report a few years ago that the baby boomer generation have on average been net 'takers' from the economy while current working generations have been net 'contributors'.

The issue is that the cost of childcare is so high it can make it unaffordable to work.

The objective of the childcare help is to keep people in work, as this is better for the country in the longer term (in terms of tax receipts, but also meaning people are less likely to claim benefits in future etc).

My childcare bill is £28,000 a year - £2300 a month. More than the average salary after tax. There is a huge incentive to stop working - the government doesn’t want that to happen, but they also need people
to have kids = childcare help.

Theres not going to be anyone to fund the pension system if the cost of raising children is so high people
stop doing it.

My now deceased ex-MIL never worked. She was a SAHM and then housewife from the date of her marriage until the day she died. She paid no National Insurance but was eligible for a state pension based on her husband's NI contributions.

She was an arch-Thatcherite who was always complaining about scroungers on benefits. I would put her in the class of people she despised as she paid no taxes or national insurance but still expected to receive a pension that other people had paid for.

Don’t we have the lowest pension amount in the whole of the EU?

I’m not expert and this is a complex topic. However UK has the lowest state pension in Europe. Means texting is a way to curtail pension income but it will fall into a population that cannot supplement the fall out with paid work.

The elephant in the room of millionaires taxation increase might bring higher revenue to the state than burdening pensioners that might have paid their mortgages but have no income other than a pitiful already taxed pension.

Would it be better to bring salaries up so more young people can work and earn decently to contemplate a future family life?