To think the standard of living for retired people had to change

[downdowndowndowndown]

I'm a millennial. I will retire in my seventies. Many in my age group will be still paying their mortgage off well into their sixties. Many will never be able to buy. This is not a moan about that.

My mums generation were able to buy cheaper houses in the eighties. Some have also inherited well (houses which their parents owned and didn't have to sell to pay for care, which had risen in price to above a million). They had better pension plans. Some were able to go to university for free and their degrees actually meant something in the workplace: They often paid off their mortgages in their forties. I see a lot of my parents relatives have retired early and have very enviable lives.

Two uncles have retired in their early sixties. They are both in good help. They spend their days on many holidays, eating out multiple times per week, going to garden centres, renovating their beautiful houses, helping children financially and with childcare. They will have presumably worked out their finances and could afford to continue to live like this for the rest of their lives! Possibly thirty more years!

I think they are possibly going to be unique in their quality of life. We will never have that and I don't see my children's generation having things any earlier.

In essence the generation before me were mostly fortunate, unless personal situations changed their financial situation or they lost their homes during the nineties interest rises. Retirements and pensions were never designed to support people for three decades and that things had to change hence raising the retirement age and making people pay more towards their care.

There will always be people who can afford a comfortable retirement, and who can retire whilst they are still young and healthy enough to be active and adventurous. The difference now, is that there will be a growing swathe of people who will not be able to consider retiring at all.

I am 63, and I can officially draw my state pension in three years time. However, there is no way I could live on that income. What is more, there is no way I could live on that pension even if it was supplemented by my small professional pension.

I am still the primary breadwinner in the family. My two adult sons struggle with their mental health and are not able to work. My husband is in a care home, so cannot contribute to anything. His retirement is *ked as well.

As well as the inherent inequality, through which there will be some people who retire comfortably, and some who can never retire, our workforce will be burdened by people who are too old, stressed and unsuitable for work. I work full time in one job and part time in two. I am knackered! If the pension at 66 was enough to live on, I would jump at the chance of giving up the employment and focusing on caring for my family. However, it is not. The state pension is a joke.

Additionally, the gig economy is swelled by people over the age of fifty, who have had to leave their previous employment (through redundances and so on) and who take insecure and demanding employment to make ends meet. Often these people are also caring for others, and perhaps not in the best of health.

Furthermore, in this country the average life expectancy is 79 for males and 83 for females. If you retire at 70, you may not have long to enjoy anything.

Not everyone over the age of 60 is looking forward to or living in a golden retirement. In some cases, we are the spectre of things to come: a worn out aging population who will die with their boots on.

I was a victim of domestic abuse in the eighties - there was no support from professionals, I was told it would be hard to bring up my three children alone if we got divorced. I did so anyway, but there was no free childcare whilst I tried to study and work. Single parents were seen as the scourge of society, second class citizens. Forty years later, my children have their own families, and all work hard to support them. I haven't yet retired at 63, but when I do so at 66, I feel I have earned every penny I get from my pension. It wasn't all a bed of roses in those days!

its amazing, next thing we will find out that our Prime Minister thinks that way too. Oh, hold on a minute, what was it we found out Boris said about Covid!

Fuck me, I must tell that to my optician!! Greedy bastard charged me £600 for my last pair of glasses!!

This. its swings and roundabouts. Yes, older people may have been able to buy houses cheaper but they dealt with much other more pronounced social issues such as racism, sexism/misogyny, homophobia etc. Women back then were also much less able to be independent and more reliant on staying in unhappy marriages etc. No generation has had it easy- they've just had different problems to deal with is all.

As a taxpayer, I am contributing to your children's education and healthcare. And to any the child benefit you may get. If you don't think pensioners should be supported by society, why the hell should society have to support your lifestyle choice to have children?

And knowing that, in your hateful world, they will have no health or social care to rely on.

You can bean count as much as you like. Most of us can count - it's not something any of us needs to boast about.

You are utterly lacking in empathy. It's quite chilling. I don't actually believe anyone thinks like that. You're just goading. If not, you need help.

Agree with this

My first flat had no heating (early 90s). I can't see many people tolerating that nowadays

In essence ...

yeah ... maybe. The pension age has already risen & plenty of people choose to work past retirement age for extra money or satisfaction. My dad only fully retired at age 80 & my mom never expected to retire, btw (but died at 63 so not tested in practice). Dad chose to keep working.

If OP is saying the pensioner triple lock needs to be dropped or changed then I wouldn't object.

My first flat had no heating (early 90s). I can't see many people tolerating that nowadays

Nor mine around the same time. First winter was brutal.

I’ll be encouraging them to vote to limit free NHS care to under 70s only.

Oh here we go again. I'll be working until I'm 70 - I'm not far off that now. My mortgage won't be paid off till I"m 67, because ... well, single, high interest rates in the 1980s (18% at one point where I was living), job moves to expensive cities, and so on.

I'm educating your children - shall I stop working 50-60 hour weeks to do so? Your DC ciuld grow up to be useless addicted wastrels - I contribute more in one year of my life to other people's DC than some people contribute in their entire lifetime.

You better hope you make it to over 70, because the alternative's worse. And you can just fuck off with your ignorant ageism.

Why is casual ageism acceptable on MN?
Racism, sexism etc are not tolerated but despising the elderly seems perfectly okay!

And the disabled.

You are utterly lacking in empathy. It's quite chilling. I don't actually believe anyone thinks like that. You're just goading. If not, you need help

Let's hope she and her children don't work in care. Even if it is goading, it's pretty disturbing stuff to come out with.

I’ll be encouraging them to vote to limit free NHS care to under 70s only.

I think this might be the harshest comment I've ever read on here. It must be a dark, dark place inside your head. Your poor children. I hope their other parent has a heart.

Another many millennial that forgets the massive interest rates paid on mortgages in the 80s, crap rates of pay under thatcher if you worked in public services. It wasn't the golden age you make it out to be. Stop with the bitterness and go and get to know your family before you no longer have them!

@Lorrymum ageism sucks and is rife here but so is racism... this is like any other platform, they can;t really control the amount of awful things said

My first house had no hot water, no heating & an outside loo. It cost me about 60% of my after-tax income on my main job (a very junior post-doc), so I worked a second part-time job to cover living costs.

Heating is a necessity. Some people will inevitably tolerate no heating because they can't afford the increased fuel bills but its not unreasonable to expect that as a basic necessity rather than a luxury.
My dad grew up in a house with no indoor toilet - most people in developed countries - wouldn't put up with that either!

And I've already made the point about Internet and smart phones - there's no moral high ground to take for not having something that wasn't invented!

Yup. YABU.
Ridiculous generalisations.
As so many have clarified for you.

Life was definitely far more basic and some of us are enjoying a much more luxurious life now - but obviously not all.
People knew no different then though and you don’t miss what you never had.

The trouble is that todays young adults are used to creature comforts and a good standard of living. Now that is changing and of course they will miss what they grew up with as they struggle to afford basic housing and living. They will indeed now miss what they used to have and I think it is this that will cause major discontent with their lives.

I think they should be insured with a system of credits - not my idea, but I agree with it.

Some major projection on this thread. OP hasn't said that people shouldn't have a nice retirement. Just that it won't be possible going forward. The whole welfare state needs cutting back IMO and people, including retirees, will have to cut their cloth.

I think you are talking about a middle class subset of that generation who were able to go to university (most didn't). And comparing to a middle class subset from your generation. Inequalities have continued to rise but now it's between the very rich and everyone else. So yes, present day middle class people can expect a less comfortable lifestyle compared to the previous generation in some ways. But while houses are more expensive, most consumer goods and travel are much much cheaper.