To think 71 is too old for state pension age?

[winterwonder1]

This isn't just for people who are 21 now - that's for people born after 1970 - so 55 now. I can't imagine being fit enough to do my job at 71.
DWP State Pension age will have to rise to 71 says report | News Shopper

71 is too old but as someone who is in their early 40s, I think that it is inevitable that I'll need to wait until then for state pension (and in my case retire).

Increasing the age, and tinkering with the supplementary elements like WFA etc is much more palatable than means testing state pension. I suspect long term that once the triple lock has gone that state pension will be aligned to basic rate tax therefore anyone with an additional pension will have to pay income tax. Given the popularity of autoenrolment this will mean most people will pay income tax in their old age which will somewhat offset the burden of paying state pension.

Every pensioner with an occupational pension of more than £100 a month pays income tax now. Quite a lot of them are higher tax payers.

Even if every single academy trust was embezzling money (your words) and we could wrest it back into LA hands (ignoring why it was wrested out of LA hands originally), that money would go to education and not solve the pension funding crises.

yes there is waste in government spending, which should be tackled, but I suspect you overestimate the amount that could be found from greater efficiencies and vastly underestimate the funding hole in the pension system. The looming pension crisis isn’t a political issue, it’s a demographic challenge. All developed economies are facing similar, which is why virtually everywhere the pension age has had to be increased

Anyone can retire at 60 and have a nice time off - they just need to pay for that themselves.

I totally disagree with this view. If life is just one boring drudge without any holidays or any fun whatsoever, and nothing to look forward to but more of the same, I'd rather die young.

There are not plenty of well-paid jobs that would allow people to save into pension schemes and also pay rent/mortgage and bills. There are lots of jobs but most of them are minimum wage. The job market for most traditionally well-paid industries at the moment, including tech, is pretty dire. A quick Google will throw up endless stories of highly qualified people who can't find work in their field. Sure they can all go and work in a shop (probably not a bar as those are all closing down) or as cleaners, but those jobs don't even pay the real living wage most of the time. Certainly not enough to be able to make significant pensions contributions.

Lots of people have no choice but to rely wholly on the state pension. It's baffling that so many posters seem unable to accept this.

as you like. Personally I think it’s possible to balance today’s pleasure against tomorrow’s security.

I’d have more sympathy if you hadn’t just posted that you can’t be bothered to save because it’s boring…

This worries me because it's not as if most of us who are 40s/50s now are going to be minted once we started getting our pension. Even if you've saved £300K into a private pension (which is what is recommended to live comfortably as a pensioner), that's £1,995 a month (at current best rates). With the state pension on top, you'd be OK so long as you've paid off your mortgage etc. If you haven't and you're still paying rent, then £2,600 a month isn't a huge amount to live on, especially considering how much more expensive life will be by then. (Yes I know people live on less but this isn't a race to the bottom). And that's bearing in mind that rates could change before then, and also that most people won't save £300K into private pensions. It's really a best case scenario.

Taxing people on top of that - when they've already been taxed on their pay which they've used to pay into their pension - seems bulllshit to me tbh. Looks like my generation (Gen X) and everyone after us are just going to be endlessly squeezed for cash.

I was talking hypothetically actually - I have a private pension I've paid into for years, being freelance on and off - but don't let that stop you being sanctimonious. I've always seen being empathic towards other people as a positive thing, personally.

Completely possible, for those who can afford it. You're coming across as very naive on this thread about people whose lives aren't the same as yours.

Thank you for clarifying I know police and teachers that are a lot younger that do pay in. Didn’t realise they always had.
my next issue is I have also paid between 8-12% into work private pensions but they haven’t performed well and still looking at life of poverty especially if state pension removed

Taxing people on top of that - when they've already been taxed on their pay which they've used to pay into their pension - seems bulllshit to me tbh. Looks like my generation (Gen X) and everyone after us are just going to be endlessly squeezed for cash.

It’s already the case, virtually everyone with an occupational pension pays income tax. Pension contributions are tax free. You can’t have it both ways, it’s either taxed on the way in or when you take it out. Currently you can take 25% of your pension as a tax free lump sum.

Add it to the long list of things not everyone can afford? Not everyone can afford the same luxuries in life and it is (ahem) naive to insist otherwise.

some people have very very limited options in their lives. Most people have choices, though - some just feel sour about those choices or resentful of others that have more options. I am not complaining about the unfairness of not being able to go on multiple holidays this year (something a majority of Brits evidently do) because I have chosen to put that money elsewhere.

Those are people on low incomes. Most people are on low incomes because they don't have any other options. The idea that anyone can work hard and earn good money is a total fallacy. It's also a misconception that people on high salaries work harder than people on low salaries - yet clearly, some people (including those on this thread) assume this to be the case and that therefore those high earners are more entitled to a better standard of living than - well let's call them poor people, because they are. Poor people apparently deserve nothing more than living hand to mouth from cradle to grave, with not even the odd takeaway to break the miserable monotony, and obviously not any holidays, the profligate spendthrifts!

Yeah sure not everyone can afford the same luxuries in life, but the odd takeaway and gasp even a weekend away isn't an insane luxury, not in the 21st century, with all the technology at our disposal to make everyone's lives more comfortable. It shouldn't be a choice between that and starving or freezing to death in old age. It's clear on this thread that the Victorian idea of the 'undeserving poor' is alive and well.

I've got 30 years to go until I reach the current retirement age and I'm honestly not going to be surprised if by that point, there isn't one.

‘Deserving’ plays no part in it - life rarely aligns with what we deserve, good or bad. Regardless of what we think we ‘deserve’ we cannot afford the current pension system and there are no easy solutions. We cannot pay our bills with credit indefinitely, and at some point have to pull spending in line with what we can actually afford. Avoiding making difficult choices leaves us all worse off, with the poorest paying the biggest penalty for lack of timely decision making.

Well, that depends if you believe in equality or not. I've never believed that capitalism should be what dictates whether people live or die, and I do believe the state has a duty to give people - ALL people - comfort and dignity in old age.

No, I don’t actually believe in equality in the way you seem to understand that term - people have different starting points and put in differing levels of effort or make different choices and therefore end up in different places in life, which I think is fine. No one is proposing the elderly poor be left starving on street corners. The reality of raising the pension age is that those who can work will be expected to do so longer unless they can pay their own way. Those unable to work at 70 will be in the same situation as those unable to work at 64 today, with a system of benefits in place to ensure a minimum of comfort and dignity.

I think we'll have to agree to disagree, because the idea of a 'minimum' of comfort and dignity for elderly people leaves me absolutely cold, as does the reality that poor people will be forced to carry on working until they drop (despite also being the ones in labour-intensive jobs that will obviously be much harder/impossible with old age) and therefore will be the ones who suffer all round, while rich/middle class people will be fine. That isn't the society I want to be living in.

Well, when you figure out how to finance your utopian vision let me know.

Not only that, but the Teachers pension was also contracted out so would give you even a smaller amount of State Pension.

Poor people not dropping dead from overwork isn't really a 'utopian vision.'

And still, we cannot afford to continue what we have today with all the wanting in the world

Whatever you call it, you have to pay for it. How?