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?

I would LOVE to see an opinion poll on means testing the state pension.

@MsPincher stoping giving money to those who choose not to work is also a way to save money
You are aware means testing benefits can be costly and you can't just take away something when people have paid in expecting it ?
There are other ways to increase money and other savings that can be made

Thé point is that we are borrowing as a country, huge amounts of money every year to pay for our current expenditure. our public services desperately need more money. We need to cut somewhere. In my opinion it should be to stop pensions to those Who are wealthy and don’t need them. Much better than attacking the poorest in our society yet again.

Seems pretty disgusting that we would give money to the rich or that people would advocate it when things are so bad. But some people are self interested.

Yes, our public services do need money. So let’s find it by taxing the bloated profits of energy providers and cutting vanity projects like HS2.

I looked at my pension forecast yesterday. Have some unpaid years due to living abroad and trying to work out if I should back pay now or if I will work enough years in the UK in the future not to bother. I didn't opt out of SERPS because I didn't also have a private pension, what I now find shocking is the additional part of the state pension relating to a percentage of what you've paid in has been scrapped and everyone will get the new state pension. I think all it's done is reduce the years I need to contribute in order to get the maximum (forecast is saying I need 13 plus the 18 complete years I currently have) but if I pay in for more years I won't get any more. How is that fair? Anyone who opted out has had that money in a private pension so will keep hold of it come what may.

I know they have, op was suggesting that some money could be used to reduce retirement age back to 65 just for women. I didn't see why you'd do this?

I find the UK system confusing. In Australia we have a means tested state pension (testing is both asset and income based - personally I think the thresholds need revising as you can have a large amount of savings and still get a part pension).

We also have mandated private superannuation where employers must pay 10.5% of your salary (on top of your salary) into a superannuation fund of the employee’s choosing. It’s awesome. Even taking into account recent share market dips my fund is performing incredibly well.

Your fund is accessible at age 67 and you could cash it out then and there if you wanted rather than being treated like children and having it dolled out like pocket money. It is taxed at 15% as it is contributed to the fund.

I hope to never need a state pension but obviously things happen and it’s great that people who need it get it.

Ah so here we are. Those who choose not to work? Who are they? Those on uc? Most of whom are actually working? The disabled? Children? What about pensioners? Why must everyone work but them?

While that may be closer to the truth today (but even today there is a disparity and women still don't earn as much as men), throughout all the earlier decades (60s, 70s, 80s, 90s and more recently) women were frequently not paid the same as men, despite the equal pay legislation of 1970, and 2010. Often their jobs were not done by men, so women's jobs remained low-paid roles as employers worked around the new laws by categorising men's roles and women's roles not to be of equal value.
Also women frequently worked part time due to child-care responsibilities, and often were not given enough hours to qualify for a full year's NI to add to their NI record, which at that time was 40 years needed for a full state pension. It later changed to 30 and is now 35 years of full NI contributions required for a full state pension, and 10 full years to get any state pension at all.

Also, women were often barred from the company pension scheme, either because they didn't earn enough to meet the entry threshold or were excluded because they worked part-time.

So while in theory women should all be equal with men now, women in their 60s approaching or recently receiving their state pension have lived through the decades where things were definitely not equal which meant they could not save into a personal pension scheme, either because they were excluded, or didn't earn enough, and they had to wait 6 more years (than they had expected) to receive what state pension they were entitled to, without the buffer of a private pension to top up their income in retirement.

Also there was the 'Married Women's stamp', which women were moved to once they married. This allowed them to pay a lower amount of NI because they would be paid a state pension based on their husband's contributions. They did not earn a state pension in their own right. Then the government changed that and women found they were missing vital qualifying years and had to pay for to make up for those missing years.

All in all it is a vastly misunderstood mess.

As other posters have said pensioners can be asset rich but cash poor and 750k isn't alot for certain areas of the country.

My great aunt for example before she died her home in London became worth £2.5million she bought it for 8k in the 60s. But it couldn't be sold as she hadn't the money to pay for the sale and wasn't in a state to.

People have paid in it's their right to claim out regardless of where they are in terms of income or assets.
This concept that it should fund others instead is ridiculous.

@TheTeenageYears I opted out but never had a private pension as that part was never explained to me by financial advisor at the time and a few years later I was told opt in
I will work the 30 years at full rate though as will prob pay on for about 50 years in total by time I hit retirement age

If pensioners stay working then the same old dimwits on here would be whining that they are taking jobs away from younger people.

I will be working until 67 full time. My DD will be grown up and disabled and the state will be paying for carers for her. According to some I should instead quit work and care for her myself and then retire and live on my tiny private pension and savings.

The energy suppliers are already paying additional tax and are not making profit in the uK. Hs2 is an infrastructure project which is essential to our infrastructure. Also coat is about £44bn - only about half of one year state pension costs for the project. Stopping paying benefits to rich pensioners makes more sense and is fairer..

@BeatieBourke leave my pension alone. I’ve paid in for years on the basis that I would get a state pension. I’ve not been a drain on the taxpayer, I’ve paid in more than I’ve taken out because that’s the way it needs to be, but my state pension may be all that I get in my old age the way things are going.

Sorry but you think we should spend taxpayers money giving weekly payments to those with £2.5m in assets? Because it’s their right to be funded? What?

are you aware of the crisis in our public services and finances?

If your state pension is all you would get, why would you be bothered about means testing?

@MsPincher exactly what I said those who choose not to which is not disabled etc as many do work and those that don't isn't a choice
I am surrounded by families who choose not to work, I don't live in middle class england, but none if these exsist, yes it may be a minority but it still costs the economy and will continue as they are not paying in and will be taking pensions eventually too
I know a young couple who both get UC , yes its not huge amounts but seeing as they have paid prob a couple of hundred pounds tax ever they still are getting a fair amount
And sanctions , yes they have had a couple but they know how to work the system
Its not their fault as they have grown up and seen family around them do similar
But lets not pretend there is no one who abuses the system and that there isn't ways around it for some people
Really we should be pushing for better wages and we could save a huge amount in UC , a couple both working full time shouldn't be needing a top up as the wages they get should be better ,
So why not campaign for better wages
Rents should be cheaper , do you know how much we pay covering rents for people on lower incomes because again rents are not in proportion to the average wage
So two things we could do to save on benefits whilst also helping people here and now live a better quality life

BP’s profits doubled in the last quarter.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-63468313

Shell’s CEO is actually asking for higher taxation.

www.reuters.com/business/energy/tax-people-this-room-help-poor-shell-ceo-tells-energy-conference-2022-10-04/

But you don’t care, do you @MsPincher because if money was found elsewhere it would spoil your irrational venders against pensioners.

No one has been excluded from pension schemes on grounds of sex since mid 1970s. Any women significantly affected by this have long retired

that also goes for married woman’s stamp.

@MsPincher did you not see the profits by British gas etc
I know another way lets tax all wages and not allow people to save for pensions tax free that will bring in income and many can't afford to pay in a pension at all

That is not true.
Loads of places excluded part time staff. Without childcare tax credits lots of mums could only work part time.

Thank you for this.

It is a very lucid analysis of the mess we're in.

Also as a pp said, those women like me who managed to pay SERPS thinking it a protection for later years, are now getting fuck all out of it once we turn turn state pension age.

We are so far from pension equality for women - especially in divorce, where women pick up the slack of child arrangements 95% of the time, affecting their careers significantly - it's a sick joke.

@MsPincher yes thats why there are a lot of women owed money from pension as it was calculated wrongly due to wrong amounts being paid women over 70 are being asked to check and people are being paid back money , but of course according to you this didn't happen either
It was right to bring womens pensions in line but it could of been done more slowly so 60 to 61 , 61 to 62 etc etc

Women are still fighting for money owed to them, and these women are in their 60s, 70s and 80s. It's disgusting.