The state pension is HOW MUCH???

[BeatieBourke]

Call me stupid (fair) but I've just realised how much the state pension is. £800 odd a month (£185.15pw).

As a non-means tested benefit. For EVERYONE.

I'm generally of the opinion that benefits are too low and too punitive. I usually advocate for universalism. I understand that people have worked their whole lives and paid in, and deserve a retirement. And that having pensioners in poverty does no favours to the economy or other welfare services.

But £800 a month / £9k a year for EVERYONE?? So a widower in rented accommodation with no other income or savings, £800pm. A wealthy 68 year old who's earned a 6 figure salary, has a huge property portfolio and investments coming out of their ears that pay a fortune out in dividends, £800pm. Seriously?

I understand that no party, least of all the Tories (because tory voters as a population are older) will ever go after pensions because it would be unpopular (and older people vote more generally). But in a time when the country is supposedly facing a financial "black hole" and everything else has already been cut to the bone for the last 12 years, why the hell are we paying out state benefits to millionaires?

Maybe if pensions were means tested (with a fairly high and tapering threshold) there'd be enough to pay pensions for women at 65, and more for people who haven't built up huge assets, can't afford to live, heat their homes or eat a hot meal every day in their later years. I can see the (cynical) political sense in it, but no economic sense whatsoever.

AIBU?

Most older people do not get UC because they do not claim it.

Means testing is a pain in the arse. In Australia you need to track your income and "assets", and my God they are opaque to see if you qualify for anything towards age-rated benefits including the state pension. The entire burden falls on the claimant.

Absolutely - why on earth are taxpayers paying for that? The country is on its knees and we are giving money to those who have plenty because they vote and vote Tory.

I might be being thick... are you saying this is what people get now? or is this a predicted future amount? because I certainly don't get that amount... my state pension is under £600 a month, I couldn't afford to rent a property on that amount of money.

If the current payout age doesn’t change then by the time I retire I will have paid NI for over 50 years, I also pay into a private pension, I have no choice in paying NI as it’s taken at source, I am not entitled to free dental care, child benefit or anything else. I’m not a mega high earner, single parent to 2 dc so it’s all a juggling act. If someone suggested means testing pensions then personally I’d like at least 30% of the 20+ years NI I’ve already paid back as I paid that based upon a social contract and if that contract it going to be changed then it should work both ways.
Also including peoples homes as part of means testing is ridiculous, look at the value of a modest house in some areas, how often would these figures all be checked, can the pensioners in their now expensive homes take out some form of mortgage to pay for food against the value of their property?
It’s easy to lash out at people who are perceived to have had it better\easier than we have it now, but state pensions aren’t really the issue, the issue is the cost of government itself, why do we pay for lunch for an mp but not enough for decent school meals, how is it they get to vote on their own pay rises, why do we pay for them to have 2nd homes etc. but whilst we’re all busy squabbling here we’re not questioning why mps are never hit with pay freezes or budget cuts.

Yes this is so unfair, that having a small private pension excludes her from all the extras you get with pension credit. Those on pension credit have had £650 cost of living payment, warm homes discount, free dental care, free TV license etc.

@chyra there are people raising two kids on less than £800 a month

As it should. Same as for every other benefit.

Exactly. And we are talking about means testing so that we are not giving an extra £800 a month to pensioners who already have plenty.

If you only had £600 state pension to live on and needed to pay rent you would get most of it paid for by housing benefit. If your state pension is only £600 every four weeks and you have no other income and no spouse you need to look at whether you would be eligible for pension credit.

The old system where the more you earned the more pension you got was fairer for higher earners, my dad paid in to SERPS & got nearly £400 a week pension & since he died my mum gets nearly £300 based on his contributions. Now it is £185 no matter what you earn. SERPS made all the overtime & weekends my dad worked during his working life worth it when he retired.

And I’m pretty sure their life is not full of hobbies , things they want to buy and buy etc. just because people live on it (I take they pay their rent out of those £800) it doesn’t mean it’s enough for having an easy life without worries

This what happens when you means test.

www.gov.uk/government/statistics/income-related-benefits-estimates-of-take-up-financial-year-2019-to-2020/income-related-benefits-estimates-of-take-up-financial-year-2019-to-2020

By the way, I have capacity, but may not in time.

Others don't have that means right now.

They would not be paying rent out of the £800.

That’s what I thought hence the other posters comment is wrong. They’re not living and taking care of 2 children with only £800/month

"Hell no.

I'm talking a much higher threshold. I dunno but, off the top of my head, maybe if you have property and investment assets worth over £750k, you get a bit less SP?

That's quite a lot of people!"

I think it will happen eventually, but as work place pensions didn't exist until 2012 the government can't take it away just yet. People (like me) have taken the state pension into account when planning for retirement. (I'm doubt I'll ever have assets over 750k so I'm safe under your rule 😂)

Sorry but state pensions are about 10% of all government expenditure. Any pay or benefits to MPs is utterly irrelevant in comparison. There is only 650 MPs. They cost a negligible amount regardless of their shenanigans. Not to say they shouldn’t behave but it won’t plug the gap in public finances.

Workplace pensions have been a thing for a very long time. They were not mandatory until recently though.

Okay expect a boom in people in their late fifties cashing in private pensions and spending them.

A pensioner with housing cost would receive help with those two. Its still one adult who has limited costs being paid the same or more infact than 3 people with constant need for new shoes, clothes, appliances, tech to actively participate in society.

No we didn’t. I had 17 years’ notice when they moved my pension age in 1996 and that was fine, I sucked it up The second time the goalposts were moved was in 2012, two years before my pension point. And we’re not “so called” WASPI women, we’re a cohort of around 300,000 who were royally screwed over with no time to prepare or plan.

Having read this full thread, the only comment I can make on this, and really it's just an observation, is that increasing the pension age means that some people who have paid in all their lives will continue to either not receive their pension, or die soon after starting to draw it down. My Dad died in Nov aged 67, and both his private and state pension, which he'd paid into from starting work at 16, were essentially lost. He was in good health until about 3 years before then, still working, and still paying in, and then seemingly a snowball of ill health, and then covid meant he died far earlier than I'd have ever anticipated.

I also agree that introducing means testing will likely result in a 'thin end of the wedge' approach whereby pensions are slowly but surely eroded like so many other state 'benefits' (and I use this term in its widest sense) have been.

YABVU. Before 1997 and the Labour Govt, millions of pensioners lived in poverty - some of it dire. It is a good thing pensioners get more help now- and remember: the majority of them are not well off silver foxes with huge pensions and million pound houses.

Many pensioners only have the state pension to live on - and nothing else. Others (women, usually) have far lower state pensions because of earning gaps while caring for children. Many need to try and be frugal to put money aside for care in their old age. Some pensioners pay rent and never own a house or pay off a mortgage, so need decent income for that.

Be very careful what you wish for. The next generation of pensioners will especially need the help from Govt because private pension provision dropped through the floor in the 1980s. Stop wishing for a race to the bottom.

100% this.