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?

Employers also pay NI so that's double - so actually fairly close to what it actually costs.

However I agree that people should get a state pension if they are poorer. state pensions will be only given to poor people anyway. It’s why they set up the new work pension

What is poor? To you?

But you haven’t paid in employers NI.

I've haven't taken anything in the way of benefits in the last 60 years and have 'paid in' for 45 of those.

Please explain how that makes me less entitled to a pension than some

@kitcat15 I just wonder if everyone actually claims what they are entitled to given they actually have to claim it rather than it be automatically paid without them doing anything and therefore if some people decide they don't need it and would rather leave it is the social pot.

It doesn’t really matter what I consider poor. The government will decide.

However as you asked, I would say someone who doesn’t have enough money to pay for all their expenses to live.

ideally a figure should be calculated which is realistic to live a comfortable life and anything above that is not poor. This figure would change by area and would have to be updated every year. Obviously will never happen.

@meateatingveggie i never said you were less entitled. We have all taken a lot including our council services, nhs care, the cost of birthing children, our education.

mall I’m saying is for most people we take out from the state much more than we put in. And I’m not referring to benefits I’m talking about all our state services.

The problem with that is that you are asking for pensions to be paid on relative values such as
what's 'poor'?
what's 'comfortable'?
how are expenses going to be assessed?
how will the area in which someone lives in be assessed? if their area is decided to be too expensive, will they have to move?

And by expecting government to decide all this, plus an annual review, it's going to have to be re-done after every GE. Plus if you have a system that assesses you on subjective criteria, you need an appeals process. All of which will cost a lot more than just paying pensions as they are now.

I think that you are forgetting something very very very important, the concept of pension. What is a pension? "a regular payment made by the state to people of or above the official retirement age and to some widows and disabled people." from Google. You reasoning is based on who needs more money and not the concept of pension. While I agree that some people need more money, because they are renting and don't have millions in private investments, pensions are given to people that are too old to work, widows or disabled people.
Some countries (Spain) has a better pension, some people get 28K euros after taxes, and some people get only 8.4K euros in a year after taxes. The system is based on your national insurance contributions or your spouse, also in you disabilities and other circunstances (15 extra days to compute per child, only for women, for example). The idea is that whoever contributed more to the system, deserves more to keep their lifestyle. If it is not enought to have a decent living, then there are other options, in the UK you have housing benefit, for example, and the state will pay for your rent, then there is a cold winter benefit and so on.

I wasn't talking about the pension. I was talking about the benefits a single mum receives as compared to the amount of state benefit (or pension if you prefer) that an OAP receives.

Pensioners typically get a higher amount per week than a single parent gets per week (for themselves, not for the child).

Universal Credit is made up of a basic standard allowance.
If you’re single and aged under 25 ... £265.31 a month
If you’re single and aged over 25 … £334.91 a month]

£334.91 a month is a little less than £800 a month.

£77 per week vs £185 per week.

Yes, a single parent will get money to support their child(ren) but that amount for a parent and child is roughly the same as the weekly amount per OAP.

That is unemployment benefit and anyone on a low income is able to claim more for council tax and rent.

Given that if you're on benefits you're probably not living in a fully paid off house, then it's not really fair.

Same as an OAP but the basic rate is 2 and half times lower.

I currently get my teacher's pension and won't get my state pension until I'm 66. When I do, they will tax me more on my teacher's pension, so I won't get the full pension in actuality (it's not £800 pcm for me, in any case).

Please be aware that if you have a separate, 'private' pension, they add the amount of state pension to it for tax purposes. The state pension is only 'untaxed' if that's the only one you get.

So, your millionaire is not getting the amount you suggest.

I am in my fifties. Private pensions were heavily encouraged to top up state pensions as so many elderly people were in real poverty.
If private pensions are supposed to replace state pensions I would never have started one as I can't save enough. I would have spent my money instead of having a good time. And frankly, I still would. Cash in my private pension, spend it all before retirement and live off the state. I would be entitled to more than the basic state pension then and I am entitled to far less basic state pension than £800 a month.

Would that be the house they worked and paid for over a lifetime and are now too old to work?

Whereas a single mother is expected to work

The government increased the state pension. So younger people retiring will get more than people retiring now or who have already retired.

Is MsPincher confusing the WASPI campaign with the Back to 60 campaign?

Back to 60 does (did?) what it says - wanted the age for women to receive the SP dropped back to 60. Was never going to happen.

I was a WASPI member and, as far as I recall, they had no objection to the rise in the SP age but rather the way it was done.

Maybe those who spent their time studying government financial outpourings knew way back that the SP age was increasing but most of us didn't. It was appallingly handled.

I had 2 years 5 months' notice that my pension was being delayed 6 years. I have the letter to prove it. That means I lost approximately £50,000. You tell me how I could have made up that shortfall over less than 2.5 years.

Then they will have to pay more rent and council tax than someone who is claiming UC. Im not saying UC isn't low but the idea is to keep you going until you get a job when you don't have dependants. If you've paid in for 35 years. The idea is that you should be able to live in relative comfort. Elderly folk need more heating etc than if you're young and fit.

The cost to administer means tested pensions are likely to be more than just making it universal.

So you're comparing what an unemployed single parent (under retirement age) with one child, living on benefits would receive compared to a pensioner, that really wasn't clear. Not all single mothers receive benefits.

I thought it would have been obvious what I was referring to but clearly I need to work on my communication skills!

A single parent with a baby needs heating (for the baby) as much as an OAP needs heating.