The Pensions Triple Lock has to go

[Flammkuchen]

When it was introduced, the aim of the Triple Lock was to increase pensions faster than earnings as the state pension was low. The TL has been very successful: pensioners now have a higher standard of living and more disposable income than working families. A pensioner couple each getting the full state pension receive £20k per year, with any private pension income on top.

This is great for them, but it comes with a trade-off. In order to increase pensions by over 10% a year, there is less money to pay nurses, teachers or doctors. Highly skilled public sector workers have low pay and there is a recruitment crisis.

AIBU to think that now that on average pensioners have higher disposable income than those in work, a policy that aims to increase pensioner income by MORE than average earnings - and so keep increasing the income of pensioner households faster than working households - needs to be rethought? Even just linking the state pension to average earnings would be better.

We are a higher earner family, why should I pay lots of taxes for services that won't exist when I reach old age? The government should just charge on it death then. The house I'm in and subsequent increase in value isn't because I worked hard. It's unearned money for literally sitting in my house 🤣🤣

“Interest rates on lower amounts” but wages were lower so mortgages were not more affordable in relative terms.

Er income vs prices was lower so houses were more affordable then.

I agree triple lock needs amending due to everything going on (including potential changes to state pension age etc so younger generations - I am not young but not a pensioner yet- do not see yet another thing go against them ). The Bank of England are appealing for pay rises not to match inflation and spark a pay wage/inflation spiral whilst they are trying to deal with it by raising interest rates. This would just go against what they do not want to happen. Personally I think it should rise with wages right now. I think they need to look at groups with the biggest increase in percentage of that group moving into poverty and help that cohort .

I think that's maybe the long term aim of stirring this up and you're playing right into their hands. Very foolish

Looks like you came to the same conclusion as me as regards the agenda behind starting this thread. I see OP pushed off halfway through, having thoroughly stirred people up.

What wise words.

😂😂😂I’m quite sure no bank would lend me money against my house at my age.Some of these suggestion’s are hilarious

You might find it hilarious but it doesn't mean it's not true 🤷🏻‍♀️

No the working age are questioning why should they pay lots in taxes and cuts when the services won't be available for them. The older generations are pulling up the ladder behind them and expecting the young to pay. I want my DD to have a better living standard than me I don't want her to work to death which is what many of the younger generation have to look forward too.

Opps "This would just go against what they do not want to happen." Should be "This would just go against what they want to happen."

And my point is why even think tis way.

Why not say shouldn't mps not get their annual pay rise instead or get rid of their obscene expenses system

Or stop wasting money on vanity projects or IT projects that also fail....

The money is there but not being used in the right way

Never ever blame a whole group for the actions of some.

I agree but why is there such a refusal to acknowledge the young are carrying a huge burden?

It's the old we worked hard trope. They did but also many got lucky with good pension schemes and their houses rising massively in value which isn't available for the young.

@MrsDanversGlidesAgain I am not trying to stir anything up. The country’s finances are in a difficult state which means that choices have to be made.

I do not believe that the state pension should rise faster than average earnings (the Triple Lock). If it does, this means there is less money to spend on public services e.g. nurses, doctors and teachers.

What on earth would be wrong with the pension increasing in line with average earnings?

When the pension is at a decent level, then yes, I believe it should be linked to average earnings. What I disagree with is the contention that it has reached this decent level yet!
And no, I'm not a pensioner!

The pension is shit but so are salaries.

A 30k salary in 2000 if it had kept pace with inflation would be about 60k today. How many salaries have done that?

I do not believe that the state pension should rise faster than average earnings (the Triple Lock). If it does, this means there is less money to spend on public services e.g. nurses, doctors and teachers

If the pension was the same amount as average earnings you might have a point. As it is you're not comparing like with like.

And on 60k you are paying more tax

If the pension was the same amount as average earnings you might have a point.

How can it be sustainable to have a pension in line with average earnings?

I haven't read the whole thread yet, but , although several pp have mentioned it, posters seem to forget that pensioners pay tax at the same rate as everyone else Granted that they don't pay NI, but any pensioner with a taxable income is excess of the nil rate band is still contributing to the general tax pot.

This isn't what the working age are getting pissed off at. We have a massive tax burden to pay but are getting cuts in services. The NHS isn't likely to exist in its current form so the young are going to have to pay out twice. Less generous pensions , increased pension age. The young are going to have to foot the majority of the bill but not receive the same services in retirement.

Sigh. I was pointing out that IF the pension was the same as average earnings then the OP MIGHT have a point about the increase being unfair and that would be a discussion worth having.

But it isn't the same amount. Using the OP's example of nurses, starting salary for a nurse is £ 24k ish. SP is £ 10K. So she isn't comparing like with like because however much the SP is increased, it still isn't going to match that so the comparison is pointless.

Sigh. The OP was taking about standard of living & I many think that conversation is worth having.

No one would say that a nurse on £24000 has a good standard of living, so how can a pensioner on £10,000?

What on earth would be wrong with the pension increasing in line with average earnings

I suppose the point of the triple lock is to raise it to a higher level, gradually over a very long period of time. Introducing big changes gradually helps reduce inter-generational unfairness.

The government are not stupider than you, so if the effect of the triple lock is to make pensions rise relative to average earnings, that must be what they have decided would be a good thing to happen.

You are arguing about a mechanism for achieving a goal based on an assumption of your own that goal should be different than it is. You need to accept that the size of the increases is not the issue. The issue, if there is one, is what the goal should be. At what level should pensions be stabilised?