Means testing State Pension

[CuriousMariette]

Do you think the time has come for this to be introduced? I don’t think the current system is sustainable as many people are living too long. I know it’s not fair and would be political suicide but Pensioner’s didn’t even suffer a 80% furlough during lockdowns. I say this from a place of having “paid in” as people say for 30 years plus already and would likely not receive a State Pension in this scenario.

[quote monfuseds]@Fr0thandBubble my point is I would say it's unusual for someone on such a high salary to be reliant on the state pension. I don't really buy into the wealthy flight narrative but it's good you have options.
I also would not rely on the state pension depending on your age as I really can't see it existing in its current form in the next 20 years & the NHS even less. [/quote]
I mean, I doubt I’d be “reliant” on it - I wouldn’t go hungry without it or anything (I hope) - I plan to keep working until I drop. However, I would not be at all happy paying the level of tax I do without an assurance that I will get it.

I have a feeling you’re right that the state pension will not exist as we know it in 20 years. There are too few net contributors to fund everyone living so long. I don’t have a problem with the state pension not existing and everyone having to fund their own private pension, but I do have a problem paying for everyone else at this level of taxation and getting nothing back. I honestly would leave the UK.

Why should I work all my life and pay in for others to benefit. Besides someone could struggle for 38 years working and then have a few last years of decent savings and assets to find it makes them unentitled

Those who have worked for 35+'years HAVE contributed through tax and NI to services that younger people and their families receive. You can't argue that younger people have contributed as much, surely? I

The majority of the population "take" more than they give. So the average person would barely be paying their own way let alone others. Plus an older person has also been younger at some point so whilst they may have been paying more tax over the years they are also using more services as they have been around longer. Everybody pays tax forward.

"The data shows that an 85-year-old man costs the NHS about seven times more on average than a man in his late 30s. Health spending per person steeply increases after the age of 50, with people aged 85 and over costing the NHS an average of £7,000 a year."

pension credit is means tested and gives a top up to state pension if its needed - and everyone else gets basic state pension - so id rather it was left like that

@Fr0thandBubble I have a feeling you’re right that the state pension will not exist as we know it in 20 years. There are too few net contributors to fund everyone living so long.

That's my point, I'm not saying it's a good thing or the right thing to do. I think it's a travesty but I just don't see how it's sustainable.

but I do have a problem paying for everyone else at this level of taxation and getting nothing back.

I think we tax too high on PAYE & not enough on CGT etc & personally favour a wealth tax.

The majority of the population "take" more than they give.

Only if they have children. If you don’t have kids I reckon you pay in substantially more than you take out. NHS expenditure is greatest at the start of life and in old age.

well young people aren't having dc which is one reason we have this issue!

If you means test it, does that mean I'm going to get all of my stamps back? Why exactly should I pay NI towards a state pension if I can't claim it?

covers other benefits not just pension

@Blossomtoes

The majority of the population "take" more than they give.

Only if they have children. If you don’t have kids I reckon you pay in substantially more than you take out. NHS expenditure is greatest at the start of life and in old age.

Who is going to pay the taxes for pensioners to draw their pensions in 30 years time if there are fewer children now?

I'm fully convinced in a few decades there will be no state pension at all so no need to put this type of thing in place

Why else are the government forcing everyone to pay into a private pension.

@DockOTheBay that's it's the major problem we have. Birth rates have fallen faster than predicted & we are also not keen on immigration.

@monfuseds

well young people aren't having dc which is one reason we have this issue!

Clearly they are, given that the birth rate is 1.58 children per woman.

@Blossomtoes you are aware that the figure you quoted is a huge decline on past decades & well below replacement rate? Why do you think the average age of the population is 40?

[quote monfuseds]@DockOTheBay that's it's the major problem we have. Birth rates have fallen faster than predicted & we are also not keen on immigration. [/quote]
It is going to be a huge problem. Top heavy population. Thousands of elderly causijg huge strain on the health services, with not enough young people to care for them and pay for it all. I don't know what they can do about it apart from hugely drastic measures such as DNR for anyone over a certain age.

"Birth rates peaked in 1964 when the number of children per woman averaged 2.93, The Guardiann_ reported. And in 2020 it was 1.58 – well below the 2.1 needed to keep the population rate stable. In Scotland the rate was even more pronounced at 1.29."

"In its study – titled Baby Bust and Baby Boom: Examining the Liberal Case for Pronatalism – the SMF found that, at present, there are a little under three over-65s for every ten workers. By the middle of the next decade that ratio will rise to 3.5 and by the 2060s the number will be nearer four. Meanwhile, by 2050 a quarter of Britons will be aged 65 and above, up from a fifth today."

Clearly they are, given that the birth rate is 1.58 children per woman.
Given that it takes 2 people to make a baby, you need 2 children per woman to replace the population. This is way below

(Yes I know some men have kids with multiple women, single mothers with IVF whatever but on average)

It would cost more than it would save and let's be honest the DWP's reputation for efficiency is not that good is it.

@DockOTheBay & yet people will moan about foreigners having too many babies. 🤔

[quote monfuseds]**@Fr0thandBubble* I have a feeling you’re right that the state pension will not exist as we know it in 20 years. There are too few net contributors to fund everyone living so long.*

That's my point, I'm not saying it's a good thing or the right thing to do. I think it's a travesty but I just don't see how it's sustainable.

but I do have a problem paying for everyone else at this level of taxation and getting nothing back.

I think we tax too high on PAYE & not enough on CGT etc & personally favour a wealth tax. [/quote]
Honestly I think the issue is that we try far too hard to keep people alive for as long as possible in this country. I’d happily pay more tax to fund better education for children, better services for disabled children (being a parent of one, I know just how dire the state provision is), generally better provision for children, etc. But taxpayers spending hundreds of thousands eking out the age of people in their 80s and 90s, I’ve got no interest in.

I agree that provisions for disabled people is shocking & I would happily support higher benefits for them.

Perhaps young people would like bigger families but the cost of the private housing is astronomical plus the eco warriors keep guilt tripping them about having dc

Do you want to, back to 1800 with no pension health care because gradually this is what will happen.

@FFSFFSFFS

Again the Australian system works very well. People in need get a pension and others privately save for the event of old age for which they have had their entire lives to prepare for.

I do think though that of course this should not be imposed on people already in the system. So it’s a big ship
To turn around

Yeah, right. I'll repeat.

As an example, the teachers' pension scheme has been downgraded twice, to give less. The private pension schemes all have a compulsory element of investment, so your income is not guaranteed.

When friend downsized because she couldn't afford to live in her house, she had her state pension cut.

@ivykaty44

pension credit is means tested and gives a top up to state pension if its needed - and everyone else gets basic state pension - so id rather it was left like that

Yes, same here.

I don't object to paying towards a social safety net - it's what we should have. But I don't think it's unreasonable to balk at the prospect of being told I have to pay towards something that I will never be able to benefit from in any way shape or form. I've never claimed benefits. I don't have - and won't be having - children. So a significant chunk of what NI funds, is not benefiting me - and that's fine because that's how society operates. But I'm not keen on the prospect of working for five decades (and most probably longer, health permitting) and not being able to get the state pension that I have paid towards, simply because I have worked.

Many countries are facing the same issue, on a global scale by 2100 the number of people aged over 65 will outnumber the under-twenties by 670 million. It's a huge unprecedented change. I assume we will see a shift of power to the younger developing countries & living standards will decline in the western ones.