To think increasing pension age isn’t going to add up?

[Tiredandconfused23]

I was reading a few recent studies about the employment situation for over 50s, basically confirming how this age group struggles to return to work, is more likely to be laid off and/or forced into early retirement and how a far higher proportion are in poverty and/or insecure employment than other age groups. And how, despite years of pushback against age bias, it’s only increased in recent years.

If we accept this, I can’t help feeling the idea that increasing the pension age so we work longer, thus save money on benefits, isn’t going to add up. Many people in their fifties would happily carry on working - the issue is many employers may not want us. You can’t keep working if there’s no job to work at.

AIBU to think we may soon be facing a load of older people on benefits, often through no fault of trying, rather than claiming a pension? Would this be seen as still more favourable by the Government?

Is it not something like 30% of people end up on sickness/ disability benefits before they hit retirement?
That's not sustainable nor does it make sense to keep putting the age up

There seems a reluctance to have the conversation about an ageing population though so governments have got away with not planning anything.

@fitzwilliamdarcy You're right. And it's not only millennials and Gen Z, who are Generation Rent.

There's nearly 1 million pensioners private renting (and I'm not sure of the figures for social renting, but it's several million). The private renting pensioners are statistically one of society's poorest groups - and many have been in poverty for all or most of their lives.

And with Gen X, it's even worse. Quite a few million are private renting (and others social renting). Private renting is the biggest problem due to the much higher (unaffordable) rents.

In fact the fastest growing group of private renters are over 45. Some have always rented, due to never having been able to buy - whilst also being the first generation to face social housing shortages. Others have had to go into renting at that later stage of life, after relationship breakdowns (including, but not only, DV), or other significant changes in financial circumstances.

There's a urgent need for more social housing across the UK - for young families, but also for middle aged and older people, and including for smaller households, and accessible homes suitable for older or disabled people.

Although that's still a rental cost, it's a lot lower than private renting, so it's not only a moral need (more social housing). It will also save the economy a lot of money - not only housing costs but also health and social care costs, because as published in the British Medical Journal, private renting (but the study found, not social renting) harms health.

That’s what I’ve done. Took my teacher’s pension (no longer gold plated, sadly, but still pretty good) at 55 then would supply to top it up - sometimes full time, usually just a few days a week . I’m 60 this month and I’m go8ng to stop altogether now and use savings to top up until the state pension comes in. Most weeks/months need more than the pension anyway.

There won't be an ageing population for long.

Life expectancy is, I believe, starting to fall.

Yes the numbers renting in retirement are going up and up & there isn’t enough suitable housing.

I actually think it will change, as there won't be the number of young people to fill the jobs anyway employers will be forced to hire or keep older staff.

My aunt and uncle who are now 80 could have retired earlier but both carried on working until 70. Without any issues, yes they where both in office based jobs but they where fit and healthy and there employers where happy to have them.

I know some people have health issues but if you don't and are happy to do so why shouldn't you keep working even if its in a reduced capacity.

It's a problem. Living longer does not always equal being capable of working longer, or being healthy for longer. My workplace has a number of workers age 55-70 and the range of health and capability is huge. We have a fit as a fiddle and sharp 70 year old versus late 50's staff recovering from strokes and heart attacks or debilitating menopause symptoms. It's difficult to have conversations about capability with a 56 year old as this is now considered young, but the work they are capable of doing tells a different story.

@Windchimesandsong We have an ageing population now and it’s already impacting the economy. Birth rates are through the floor, when do you think we won’t have an ageing population?

I agree, my dad was made redundant in his late 50s and it was much harder for him to find a new role than it had previously been. The government can mandate what it likes but it doesn't help the bias/unconscious bias that many employers hold against older individuals. Even if the official state pension age (and therefore the unofficial 'retirement age') gets pushed back and back, I think many employers will still assume people will be looking to retire in their mid-60s latest.

I actually think it will change, as there won't be the number of young people to fill the jobs anyway employers will be forced to hire or keep older staff.

Thats true, there will be no choice in some areas.

As pointed out though, if those people can’t find jobs anyway because it’s convenient for employers to lay off or retire older workers early and they then have less probability of finding a new job than the under-fifties, they’re going to be living off the taxpayer regardless. Just not in the form of pensions.

Absolutely this. I'm a nurse (mental health so I don't do much moving & handling but there can be restraints etc that need to be carried out) and no way am I going to be able to carry on till I'm 67. Potentially older by the time I retire. 60 would be the perfect retirement age (55 preferably for me!) and leave more jobs for the younger ones. Although I don't know if there would be enough people to fill all the vacancies, we don't seem to have enough people to fill all the vacancies now and people are currently working till they're what, 66?

If there was more social housing, more people would feel able to afford to have kids. Anyway there's also net migration - and the majority of migrants are young and healthy, so there's plenty of younger working age people around to work.

But anyway older people now are not impacting the economy in any significant way. There's billions (money, not people) around. It's just not being spread equally and or spent appropriately.

And it's also a short term thing - ageing population, because life expectancy is falling.

On a related note, if the "problem" really is people living longer, then why are there increasing "live longer" campaigns and legislation? Why discourage smoking or unhealthy eating? If lots of people living longer is a "problem", why not encourage smoking (and junk food), so there's smoking tax revenue and people die younger of heart attacks?

There's currently more people on unemployment benefits than there are total job vacancies in the UK.

As someone some way from retirement with a state pension age of 68, I fully appreciate I'll probably never get it.

We all know we're paying for this generation of pensioners to have a retirement we'll never have sadly. It's not their fault - that money that they paid in wasn't saved, wasn't put to one side by successive governments and is all gone.

The state pension cost has gone up by billions and will only get worse. There's no one to pay for it and the smaller group of people left working will have higher taxes to fund it. Something needs to change.

It's already going up. I'm 63. When I started work in 1979, the state pension age for women was expected to be 60. Now mine is 67. we've had to get used to the idea as we went along (worlds smallest violin, I know)..

I don’t think you understand @Windchimesandsong

Yes, more social housing will encourage more births but the problem is pretty common across the West as social housing alone doesn’t influence birth rates. Even countries that incentivise dc haven’t seen big increases & we already have a very unequal society particularly across generations.

“And it's also a short term thing - ageing population, because life expectancy is falling.”

Life expectancy has fallen slightly, at what point are you saying we won’t have an ageing population?

But anyway older people now are not impacting the economy in any significant way.

Of course more older people impact the economy when you look at spending on state pension, the NHS & a shrinking tax payer base.

On a related note, if the "problem" really is people living longer

Its a good thing that people are living longer, what isn’t good is we have not done any planning or investing for that fact.

Because deaths from obesity related illness and cancer are pretty expensive. A long period of decline and pricey treatments, nursing, surgery, palliative care etc.

I agree with you especially your last paragraph. As you say, life expectancy is reducing in the UK and future, projected pandemics are going to take more of the older population and migration will supply younger working people if the government would get it together and let them work if they're legal.

I think it's a bit of a shame to stop encouraging younger people to eat healthily and from what I've seen where I live, it's older people stuffing their faces in unhealthy eating places, the advice to change your diet goes over the head of most of them. I think the demise of the NHS is another factor, we are clearly at a moment of change which will involve bringing in an insurance based service and more care will be rationed. I think the population profile is going to change hugely and also the way people work. We really need to do something about the inflated property market and we need to provide more social housing.

I think we have a massive ticking time bomb with regards to this. Younger people are unable to get on the property ladder and face a lifetime of renting, and at the same time also cannot afford to save sufficiently for retirement. So we will have a lot more older people on benefits in the future. Back in the day more people had a mortgage that was paid off well before retirement and many also had a lovely final salary pension so were nice and comfortable in retirement. Even those who will be mortgage free in retirement in the future are unlikely to have saved enough into their pensions to fund a comfortable retirement.

I’d have thought older workers might be more popular with many employers than the apparently increasing cohort of young people who think it’s against their human rights to be asked to turn up on time, and who think that feeling a little bit anxious about anything is a valid reason for taking sick leave.

Came to say this. On this alone it will save money,

This may be true for your generation but just 10-15 years down it's very different.
Many people I know their 40s are only just getting on the housing ladder. DH and I are mortgaged til he's 70 as we only bought our first house 2 years ago.
All our money now is going on immediate needs - childcare, bills - rather than extra retirement prep.
We expect to work longer. We expect to have to retrain, go freelance, have multiple careers.

Because pay for many people is so piss poor.

Or at least, despite us being urged to save more for retirement, after paying massive mortgage payments/rent each month, childcare, taxes, fuel and energy, food etc....there is nothing left over to put in the pension pot except the bare minimum.