To worry that the conservatives are going to target pensioners next

[Sjdorset]

Have anyone else noticed the anti pensioner stuff out this week? Firstly about getting rid of the essential tripple lock (2.5% so not a huge increase) and the talk that pensioners are supposedly getting more than working age people (why shouldn't they after all they have worked their entire life and don't have options available to increase their earnings).

I'm worried they maybe next on the target list, quite frankly I think this is a worrying trend building up.

www.express.co.uk/finance/retirement/445956/Fears-for-pensions-as-government-s-crucial-triple-lock-guarantee-faces-axe

Today's pensioners benefitted from free university

Very few of them did. If you retired last week you were born in 1950 (for a man) or 1953 (for a woman). Go and look up what university take up was between 1968 and 1971: I think you'll find it's substantially less than 10% (7% or something, I think) and heavily slanted towards men.

I know for my dads age group it was something like 3%. My dad has a bachelors degree he completed in Canada. He was offered a place to do a masters at MIT and was offered a place with tuition waived at Harvard for their MBA program. He turned both masters programs down because he in his mind he wasn't academic. To him being academic meant going to university in the UK. He realized his mistake in later years and was a visiting professor at 4 top schools as he is an expert in energy absorption. He was able to do his research and public outside of a traditional research environment. Today it is extremely rare that happens. Back then it was far far more common because so few people were studying at university.

The generation that has been given a huge opportunity is those who are in their mid 40s to mid 50s now. They didn't have to pay for tuition, a tertiary education was open to many more and women had far more opportunity to return to work and have a family. Also they had an opportunity to buy a home before house prices sky rocketed.

Anyone born in the 80s or onwards is going to have a very hard time.

I don't think a majority of boomers went to university, let alone pensioners, but you're not going to get an accurate picture simply by looking at those years. Not everyone who had tertiary education went when they were young.

Today's pensioners benefitted from free university I was born in 1952. We did not 'come of age' until we were 21. Therefore the parents of the lucky 10% who went to University and the further 10% or so who went to Teacher Training College or Higher Education institutions were expected to cough up. I had a grant of £33 a term and my father was expected to pay £12 a month. I only knew one person who was on a full grant. Everyone else's parents paid something- some people's parents paid the whole of their maintenance.
When my first two children went to University (1994) DH and I were expected to contribute. DS1 is now 40, DD 39, so there must be quite a few Mumsnetters who got 'free' University (ie no tuition fees) who are nowhere near pension age.
My parents' generation (those in their 80s and 90s) were much less likely to go to University. My DF started work at 15 and carried on working until he retired, so I don't begrudge him any of the benefits he receives.

Let's all race to the bottom as fast as we can and bash the pensioners whilst we do it.

To get the same income from a private pension as a state pension you would need to have a pension fund worth £250k - based on current annuity rates. How many of today's pensioners paid in that amount in National Insurance. The state pension should be for those who need it. The rest of us should be paying into private pensions.

The generation that has been given a huge opportunity is those who are in their mid 40s to mid 50s now.

University take up in the early 1980s, ie for those born in the 1964 peak of the boom, was about 12%.

I don't think a majority of boomers went to university,

See above. 12% at most.

The rest of us should be paying into private pensions.

Which have been proven in the past can collapse or fail and give you nothing.

Pensioners have done very well relatively to the rest of the population. Personally I think the 2.5% component of the triple lock should be removed (creating a double lock) as I don't see why pensioners need special treatment in times of low inflation and low rises in average earnings, especially given that pensioners now on average have mor disposable income than people of a working age.... I also think benefits winter fuel payments and tv licences should be means tested.

Any savings from this would be far better invested in the supporting the elderly with social care, which can be devastating on personal finances.

Let's all race to the bottom as fast as we can and bash the pensioners whilst we do it.

This seems to be the common refrain of those who are against all reductions in benefits as a matter of principle... Just because someone is elderly, and deserving of decent standard of living, respect and dignity, doesn't mean they should be automatically entitled to everything the state may currently provide without any discussion or debate. It's as though some on here, when someone raises an issue about benefits and the like, close their eyes, put their fingers in their ears, and shout 'No cuts, not cuts, no cuts....' if pensioners were entitled to 6 week luxury saga cruises each year on the state, they would support it!

*The rest of us should be paying into private pensions.

Which have been proven in the past can collapse or fail and give you nothing.*

In which case the poster said there should be a state pension for those that need it.... Are you saying that people shouldn't pay into private or work pensions?

I think only paying a state pension to those in need of one is problematic though as it disincentivises those of relatively modest means from putting money aside into a pension pot. If, for example, the means tested state pension was £500 per month, and I could afford contributions throughout my career to give me a pension also of £500 per month, thus removing my entitlement of a state pension, I'm seriously going to consider whether it's worth the contributions! I'm not sure how you get round that issue...

Perhaps you could have a tapering arrangement where ther individual who has a £500 private pension gets a £400 state pension, with this reducing as the private pension increases, but to do that fairly you would need to equivalent of a tax return complete each year or when circumstances changes.... And i can't see how that would work, especially given the people having to navigate this would include people in their 80s and 90s. In summary, a universal state pension is probably the only option that works.

They have enjoyed sky rocketing house prices,years of CB which if you have 3 children amounts to £40k over 18 years( quite a chunk off any mortgage)

If you'd bought a house 25 years ago that £40k would have virtually paid for a small but half-decent house outside the south-east! The balance is all wrong, and the Tories are making matters worse with their current policies...

The world has changed.

My parents (pensioners) both had free university, my father's grants/bursaries so high he spent hi summers inter-railing around Europe.

My mother worked for approx 5 years and has pent the last ~20 years collecting 600+ PCM public sector pension. In addition her nhs "draw" is multiples of this 600pcm. She must've paid gazillions ni during that five years... ;)

My pensioner friend told me last week he bought his first house with 8 weeks wages. 15k. 7 days a week construction on a gov job. Not a civil engineer, but a labourer.

Anyone kno of labouring jobs paying circa 750k PA?

As I say, the world has changed.

enjoyed years of CB which if you have 3 children amounts to £40k over 18 years
can you show your calculation for this as in the 1970s when most pensioners' children were born the family allowance/child benefit hovered around £1-£4 per week with extra for lone parents and often nothing for first children. genuine question as I am sure you have done the maths. (of course those who had only one child got nowhere near £40K )

Who has weekly wages of £2k back in the day when current pensioners were working.
this is getting more and more ridiculous with all these statistics being bandied about. My first house with a 10% required deposit was bought in 1970s with 3 times my annual salary (not 8 times my weekly salary!) and I was on £3k a year and this was an ordinary terraced house (not in London)
my father's grants/bursaries so high he spent hi summers inter-railing around Europe.
errm - granrts were means tested (don't know about bursaries) I and most of my university contemporaries in the late 1960s HAD to work during the holdidays - Butlins, Retail, Christmas delivery as we had no 'benefits' over the holiday.

Echt - my aunt and her partner have been together for about 20 years. He lives in a 2 bed council house while she lives in a 3bed recently bought council house. I object to her being allowed to buy the 3 bed house because she could move into her partners house and a family could have had the 3 bed house. There are so many families who need 3 bed houses yet an over 60yr old has been allowed to buy it and live in it by herself.

It's as though some on here, when someone raises an issue about benefits and the like, close their eyes, put their fingers in their ears, and shout 'No cuts, not cuts, no cuts....' if pensioners were entitled to 6 week luxury saga cruises each year on the state, they would support it!

Now this is getting silly. Of course people wouldn't support saga cruises!

People imo are just getting tiered of inaccurate stereotyping and statistics that are being thrown around.

the fruits of prosperity are not being shared across age groups but rather pumped excessively into making the lives of pensioners more comfortable
www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/oct/24/conservatives-young-people-david-cameron-pensioners

The company pension has turned into an unrepeatable special offer for one generation....…..younger employees who are working to generate revenues to plug deficits in pension schemes that they cannot themselves join
www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/oct/24/young-bear-burden-of-pensioner-prosperity

I think it goes further than inaccurate stereotyping and unfounded statistics; massive assumptions and a lot of discriminatory comments as well.

I blame the government not the pensioners