Who’s going to pay our pensions in 20-30years if the UK keeps its birth rate low and also restricts immigration?

[AlertEagle]

posted from another forum
Serious question. The UK’s birth rate is well below replacement level, meaning fewer young people entering the workforce. At the same time, the political mood seems pretty anti-immigration, even though immigration is one of the only things that’s kept the tax base stable.

State pensions are paid by current workers’ National Insurance contributions, not some magic fund. So… what happens when there’s a huge retired population and not enough working-age people to support them?

Will the government raise taxes, increase the retirement age, cut pensions, or eventually U-turn on immigration just to prop things up?

Feels like a ticking time bomb no one’s really addressing. Curious what others think, is anyone actually planning for this?

Or are we as a nation willing to give up state pensions if it means less immigration?

It would be easier for the benefits system to be reviewed. But that’s not going to happen under a Labour government.

People are not onsentivised to save for their own pensions because the government gives people we go have never saved pension credit so they get about £3 less than those who paid in years of NI stamps. People should be encouraged to save more towards their own pension for their old age.

@frozendaisy I agree with you regarding equity release. I've been in a position twice where equity release would have helped me enormously (exH buggering off, etc), but I don't like the structures in place for those schemes.

It seems to be what we are ending up with though

Yes the big issue is housing.

It needs to become affordable once more at x3 the average salary as opposed to x10.
The government needs to invest in social housing which cannot be sold off, rented to third parties, or passed down to a child/relative.
It could also build truly affordable, not for profit modular starter homes with things like solar panels for cooling as well as heating and be well insulated so minimum energy costs. Recycled grey water etc. These would be sold based on rises in inflation only (not speculative market rent so they always remained affordable).

There should be a rent cap for private rentals.

All of this would reduce the massive housing bill that the government is paying to private landlords. It would also free up more money for people to spend and do grow the economy. Perhaps people would be able to think about having a child/ more children.

There could also be incentives for elderly people to move out of larger homes into smaller properties (more of these need to be built as there is a lack of suitable single level housing at the moment). Apartments would work as they have lift access. They could have communal/ courtyard gardens with plenty of seating.

Writing, admin. Plenty that don't involve the stress of dealing with teenagers (and SLT) every day!

It seems to be what we are ending up with though

I read recently that a Reform council wants the gov to reconsider ending visas for certain overseas workers as they need the workers.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx201znge11o

Tbh I wasn’t discussing what people want. I was speaking of whats best for the country

Do immigrants not age or something? How does that work? Or are we asking if we need even more immigrants down the line to pay the pensions of the immigrants we need today to pay for pensions ?

Well not everyone would agree that people living in accommodation that is too dense, is best for the country if it brings with it a higher risk of ill health, poor MH, anti social behaviour and levels of crime.

If these properties are in the private purchase market, people will just buy other properties instead.

Threads like this terrify me. Sometimes it seems that even if you’ve planned well the odds are against you. My DH and I save into pensions. We’ll be ok as long as we have each other I think and somehow manage to pay off the mortgage.

We’ve risked a lot now to get our son a mortgage early (18, still at Uni) and save a paltry amount into a pension for both DC.

we need to do more don’t we? Feck. It’s never going to be enough.

Yep I agree, then you have the worry at the back of your mind that you’re letting life pass you by because you’re too concerned with 30 years down the line.

High levels of inward migration are associated with suppressed birth rates in the host population. It’s possible to speculate on why. Factors might included infrastructure and services stress, such as the affordability and availability of housing, access to healthcare, education and job opportunities; suppression of wages due to increased competition from people willing to risk for less; increased likelihood of needing to move further away from family support structures to fund jobs and homes.

Yes the big issue is housing.

I said this several pages ago. Sort out housing and other necessary costs like utilities. Surely that's an easier solution than having 70 year olds hoying themselves round Amazon warehouses and then euthanising them five years later.

I think the problem is housing costs too. Young people need to save fro their own retirement rather than relying on the state pension which isn't affordable. I think it would be a good idea to highly tax second homes (especially if they're left empty). There are exemptions eg when an executor is selling a home following death. It's disgusting that homes are sitting empty when young people can't afford to buy.

Nobody should have to work till 70.
If we can finance wars, we can let people retire. It's a matter of priority........Look after your elderly or strut the world stage like Billy Big Baws

Incidentally, migration (both within countries and across international borders) is correlated with a collapse in birthdate among the migrating population. Cities in particular act as a huge population sink, sucking working-age people in rather, than generating their own work forces. These people have fewer children than the average in their rural place of origin.

Migration policies that encourage temporary migration from high earning , tax paying immigrants (who leave before getting old) provide the tax revenue to support pensions and public services, without taking on the burden of paying forvthisecpeoplevuf they get elderly or infirm. This is what the Gulf states do.

YANBU. Miriam Cates has been sounding the alarm about this for years.

I don’t have a problem with a falling population, and think globally our planet needs it, but there will be a hell of a painful few decades for the country to ride out trying to support the pensioners without enough workers to pay the NICs.

State pension age will have to rise and I expect we’ll see means testing.

Immigration has to come down.

It’s likely that raiding the state pension more will push increasing numbers of older people onto disability welfare because of health problems and incapacity. It’s literally rearranging the deckchairs on the ship.

This. This is the threat to civilization which has, since earliest times, been based on the need to acquire specialist knowledge.

Suddenly knowledge is apparently replaceable by cut and paste (it isn’t of course, that’s my point).

Some of us have been asking about the economic implications for 20 odd years since computers began to bite, and the only answer has been empowering a few aggressive shits to grab housing resources and force the rest of us into a new serfdom. It’s a new version of Enclosure times but with no prospect of the invention of factory work around the corner - there’ll be some machine doing that too.

Who told you immigration is going to sort your pension?

Immigrants are net takers, on average not earning enough to even pay for their themselves and their larger than average families.

This Ponzi scheme will come crashing down in the not too distant future as immigration is just exacerbating the problem.

I think in many ways, life is just a lot more hassle than it's worth. All these worries to carry, and what for, to end up dead anyway!

Victorian terraces were never an issue. Criminals can live anywhere they aren’t just in terraces, they live in detached houses too. It’s not exclusive

people buy whatever is available. Less wasted land on detaching means more housing / acre means The available new houses are less £/m = more affordable. People struggle to buy a home so make them more affordable

@duvetsmuvet
success in life NOW depends

It’s nearly always depended on it. It’s only very recently that free education and house price rises have changed that. That’s just Practically one generation

Too many people are unaware of this. Pensioners do pay taxes, often having to sell their assets if necessary and depend on younger generations who look down on them. Pensioners don't pay national insurance because it is covered by the younger generations for them. In turn, the younger generations will eventually become pensioners themselves, and future younger people will pay for them. Each new generation dislikes the previous ones. It's circle of life.

I saw people talking about IHT, and I honestly can't stand it. It feels so unfair—I'm already paying over half of my salary in taxes, and even after I die, there will still be more taxes to pay. Sure, I know my DC will technically be the ones paying it, but the asset is mine, it's under my name, so in a way, I'm still paying for it indirectly. It's such a cruel joke. An even worse cruel joke is that my DC will have to sell everything to pay IHT, leaving nothing for them.