to think if the state pension age of 68 is being brought forward.........

[JenniferBooth]

then they need to stop moaning and whining when there are no family members (read women)
to provide unpaid care so elderly relatives can be discharged from hospital
You cant have it both ways.

Well they'd be the most impacted because they would bear the full brunt of saving for themselves and still paying for the full amount for the generation above. The generation below then would only have to save for themselves. I'm not sure how this can be avoided.

I agree. But that isn’t the way this thread’s going, to be fair.

Incidentally, can you see why we WASPIs were so angry now? Two women born in consecutive years - one gets her pension at 61 years, 11 months, the other at 64 and three months. That’s a big difference.

I don’t think anyone dare abolish state pension whilst people are paying NI.

The idea was that you supported the people above you until it was your turn. So everyone expects and is right to want their turn. Otherwise why are we paying NI? Why would anyone give up some of their salary in the acknowledgement that they would get a pension to have it snatched away at the last minute? No government will do that.

If they want to reform if, it would have to start with a very young age group because everyone has in effect paid in. But this would just shaft younger people.

If you're in a low paying job, renting, then there isn't a choice being given about not working until the state pension age. It's not higher paid workers that will be effected, as if evidenced on this thread by those saying they simply won't keep working, have private pensions. It's those reliant on state pensions, lower income workers, many men and women, that don't have the luxury of choice and will basically no work until they drop.

Otherwise why are we paying NI?

unfortunately it's not ringfenced & it doesn't just pay for pensions & what it's paid isn't enough.

I’ve not been able to work due to long term ill health. I’m expecting to be starved / frozen due to lack of income, if not incarcerated in something like the workhouse if we still have a torie government in a few years time.

Yes, l get this. But they can’t just remove what someone has spent 40 years paying for. Whatever it’s used for, no government is going to say ‘Yeah, you spent 40 years paying NI on the understanding you’d get a pension, but you can’t have it now, and tough shit if you’ve not made your own provision’

Not going to happen. What would the people who suddenly had it whipped away be expected to live on?

Will this just not increase the pressure on the benefits system?
Surely it will lead to more people claiming disability benefits etc

When the youngsters retire, there will no money in the pot to pay them

The thing is, if (for example) the government removed NI for people born after a certain date, and said that they would get no pension as a result, that generation would still need to fund the pensioners above them. It would just be done through income tax rather than NI.

So either income tax would go up or public services be cut, or both, but the younger generation would have to pay for it somehow nonetheless.

The PP upthread who said it was essentially a massive ponzi scheme was right. It only works if you have a big enough pool of new entrants (young people) to fund those currently receiving pensions. When the demographics swing in the wrong direction, as is currently the case, the whole thing becomes unsustainable.

I have no idea what the answer is.

The thing is, if (for example) the government removed NI for people born after a certain date, and said that they would get no pension as a result, that generation would still need to fund the pensioners above them. It would just be done through income tax rather than NI

Christ, l never thought of that!!!! I don’t know what the answer is. We’re locked into this rolling programme!

Shhh. You're disrupting the Poor Millenials Have it the Worst ever, Boomers Should Give Us All their Money narrative.

I’m not even Gen Z or whatever but I feel for them more - the sheer cost of everything

Boomers are fine

And it is simultaneously true that people are (a) living longer than ever (at a population level) and therefore receiving their pensions for longer than governments have previously budgeted for, and (b) healthy life expectancy has not increased by enough to allow people to work much beyond the current pension age (again, at a population level).

There is significant variation in both life expectancy and healthy life expectancy on the basis of class and geography. Should we have differing pension ages based on those factors? It would be evidence based at least, but hugely unpopular among the voting classes!

Is that true though? Most people I know my age don't stand to inherit much. Parents homes are most likely to be sold to pay for their care.

Can you imagine the MN threads if MC people (assessed by income and postcode, perhaps) were given a higher pension age? 😂

Higher earning people are in a much better position to save for a good private pension, and could opt to have a lower retirement age by using that private pension. And the difference in both life expectancy and healthy life expectancy is huge between highest and lowest earners, so there are good potential arguments for it...

Statistically it is. Doesn't mean everyone you personally know, any more than everyone you know gets the average salary. Also, only around 15 percent of over 85s need residential care.

Inheritance will just entrench inquality (just like the bank of mum and dad does) as there is massive disparity in what people inherit based on their background.

From what I have seen it will be in action in 2035, so if you were born 1967 or earlier it won't affect you.

No. Not all Boomers are fine, and it's time people stopped spouting this shit.

Not if posters are going to do posts like the one I replied to.

My sympathy is with the younger generations. People expect more and more for less.

Well I have to ask, why didn't they go back to work? How did they support themselves, why do they think the world owes them a pension?

Oh it was you… then you brought it on yourself with the sarky post.

It depends on what job you do surely? Not everyone works in offices.
Some people do very physical and manual type jobs.

Even if I don't have a state pension, I still expect that the kids will finish uni and leave home in my mid 50's and the mortgage will be paid off by about 60 so life will be cheaper and I can work part-time, perhaps some consulting or similar taking ad-hoc projects for as long as I want. There would still be time then to care etc. I doubt many will do 9-5 at 67/8.