Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

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

565 replies

AlertEagle · 27/07/2025 12:59

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?

OP posts:
Thread gallery
7
Platosrevenge · 30/07/2025 09:23

ThatBoldBear · 29/07/2025 16:57

Well said. The mental gymnastics people go through to argue that the paying in part
is only for other people is amazing.

Hang on. Hasn’t immigration legislation changed recently ? You have to earn >£30k and can’t bring dependents.

jasflowers · 30/07/2025 09:35

Platosrevenge · 30/07/2025 09:23

Hang on. Hasn’t immigration legislation changed recently ? You have to earn >£30k and can’t bring dependents.

Depends, some dependents are still allowed, but it really is a case of horse and stable door.

Brexit caused the 2m let in by the Tories plus yet again, failing to act once they saw the issues.
Prior to this, it was mainly EU citizens coming here, approx 230k per year, not the 1m pa under Sunak, & didn't bring in so many dependents, as they could easily go home again, as many did, our trust lost pretty much all its EU HCP's replaced by SE Asians, Africans and a great deal of language/training issues.

The shame is, most of these countries desperately need these HCPs themselves

EasternStandard · 30/07/2025 09:44

Papyrophile · 29/07/2025 20:58

So the notion of increasing employers' NI and reducing the start point for paying it to £5k just reduces job opportunities for young people? That's going to fuel economic growth?

Labour seem to think so. But they also said one tax hike ant last budget and borrowing is already up so welfare cuts and more tax rises on the horizon.

I doubt even they planned for that. So they’re struggling already.

Blackcordoroys · 30/07/2025 11:38

jasflowers · 30/07/2025 09:35

Depends, some dependents are still allowed, but it really is a case of horse and stable door.

Brexit caused the 2m let in by the Tories plus yet again, failing to act once they saw the issues.
Prior to this, it was mainly EU citizens coming here, approx 230k per year, not the 1m pa under Sunak, & didn't bring in so many dependents, as they could easily go home again, as many did, our trust lost pretty much all its EU HCP's replaced by SE Asians, Africans and a great deal of language/training issues.

The shame is, most of these countries desperately need these HCPs themselves

Which is why indefinite leave to remain is being reduced (criteria now 10 years rather than five, and it could be cancelled altogether for this wave of immigrants). If these millions - the Boriswave - were given IDR it would cost us billions and billions as they are almost entirely net recipients of public money, once housing and pensions etc are taken into account.

jasflowers · 30/07/2025 13:59

Blackcordoroys · 30/07/2025 11:38

Which is why indefinite leave to remain is being reduced (criteria now 10 years rather than five, and it could be cancelled altogether for this wave of immigrants). If these millions - the Boriswave - were given IDR it would cost us billions and billions as they are almost entirely net recipients of public money, once housing and pensions etc are taken into account.

Edited

That doesn't matter, many of these people wont be able to afford to return home, even if they wanted too, a flight to Manila etc is not the same as a £15 Ryanair flight to Warsaw.
Who is going to cancel IDR? let alone make sure people leave.

There are no such plans to do so, they will eventually be another wave of pensioners to fund.

The idea we can can just keep importing people in some vain hope they will pay for current pensioners is total madness.

We need to accept that if we want decent public services and pensions, then we are going to have to pay for them.

Higher taxes don't have to mean lower growth either, schools roads hospitals etc all have to be built.

Its called investment - people would be a lot happier paying in if they actually got something back for it, instead a 2 year wait for a knee op or a £800 repair bill when they hit a pot hole.

Papyrophile · 30/07/2025 20:24

I am happy enough to pay for public services provided by the local authority; I already stump up almost £4k council tax annually, and on top we paid DMIL's care home fees in full at £50K pa, and educated our one child mostly privately, but my bins are emptied reliably which is my main requirement from the council. I have never called the police or the fire service in my life, so the services I am funding are not ones I use. Therefore they must be services someone else needs to have provided. I know I am fortunate to be competent and solvent, but when I bother to think about it, which is rarely, I do rather think someone is systemically taking the mick. I am not any kind of guru genius with special powers.

WunTooThree · 30/07/2025 20:34

Papyrophile · 30/07/2025 20:24

I am happy enough to pay for public services provided by the local authority; I already stump up almost £4k council tax annually, and on top we paid DMIL's care home fees in full at £50K pa, and educated our one child mostly privately, but my bins are emptied reliably which is my main requirement from the council. I have never called the police or the fire service in my life, so the services I am funding are not ones I use. Therefore they must be services someone else needs to have provided. I know I am fortunate to be competent and solvent, but when I bother to think about it, which is rarely, I do rather think someone is systemically taking the mick. I am not any kind of guru genius with special powers.

Edited

You are paying for the police or fire service to be there just in case you need them.

Papyrophile · 30/07/2025 20:53

You don't say....? stunned surprise.....of course I am!

I am not an idiot. I have home insurance too and my house hasn't burned down or flooded either, but I continue to pay the premiums for the risk. I don't pay pet insurance premiums because now my dog is nearly 12 years old, no insurance company is going to pay for big treatments. Meanwhile, I will pay £90 for some physio training to keep PapyroDog comfortable during her last couple of years.

Papyrophile · 30/07/2025 20:54

I'm not expecting miracles @WunTooThree .

Jennps · 30/07/2025 23:15

Platosrevenge · 30/07/2025 09:23

Hang on. Hasn’t immigration legislation changed recently ? You have to earn >£30k and can’t bring dependents.

No one earning £30001 is a net contributor. So basically the laws in this country are set up to bring in people who have to be paid for by those already here.

suburburban · 31/07/2025 06:57

Jennps · 30/07/2025 23:15

No one earning £30001 is a net contributor. So basically the laws in this country are set up to bring in people who have to be paid for by those already here.

Won’t anyone on that salary be paying council tax though?

jasflowers · 31/07/2025 07:09

Jennps · 30/07/2025 23:15

No one earning £30001 is a net contributor. So basically the laws in this country are set up to bring in people who have to be paid for by those already here.

A single person, healthy and no kids, will be net surely? bear in mind all the other taxes they'll pay, VAT, insurance taxes, council tax.

If they are still a "taker" then that truly does show how austerity and holding down wages has wrecked the country?

Not really sure why we are paying for so much of the most expensive childcare in Europe for everyone? on top of child benefit.

Why is it the most expensive in Europe? when staff earn a pittance, surely we should be looking at that and making sure we are getting value for money?

Blackcordoroys · 31/07/2025 07:50

Not over their lifetime they won’t be, including health and pension and care in older age.

Jennps · 31/07/2025 08:17

suburburban · 31/07/2025 06:57

Won’t anyone on that salary be paying council tax though?

Potentially not, once they have been in the country long enough and start claiming benefits. And even if they are not eligible for benefits, the kind of immigration was have is people bringing their larger families and then elderly relatives with them. So they are a million miles from being net contributors, even with council tax.

Jennps · 31/07/2025 08:27

jasflowers · 31/07/2025 07:09

A single person, healthy and no kids, will be net surely? bear in mind all the other taxes they'll pay, VAT, insurance taxes, council tax.

If they are still a "taker" then that truly does show how austerity and holding down wages has wrecked the country?

Not really sure why we are paying for so much of the most expensive childcare in Europe for everyone? on top of child benefit.

Why is it the most expensive in Europe? when staff earn a pittance, surely we should be looking at that and making sure we are getting value for money?

Unfortunately they are not.

And austerity did not hold down wages. Where did you hear that. Thats not how wages and fiscal conditions work. The wages are held down by poor productivity in the economy. And that started when Bliar and nu Labour opened up the borders to unlimited immigration in the late 90s while also creating a nation of welfare dependent handout takers who would do anything but work.

When you give people free money to sit at home and import low skilled, low wage migrants to do the work that locals should be doing or businesses should be investing in automation for machines to do, then wage suppressions happens.

And that disastrous immigration policy continues to this day. We have almost 10million people of working age on benefits in this country. That’s right, almost 10 million.

Benefits are not a symptom of low wages. They are a cause. Wages are suppressed because benefits can subsidise wages so employers don’t need to pay market rates or invest in automation. As well as benefits dependent local population, employers can also access unlimited low skilled immigrant labour who will work for lower wages and within a few years of being in the country are also claiming benefits themselves. So the cycles continues, suppressing wages more and more and more.

Grow123 · 31/07/2025 08:28

Jennps · 31/07/2025 08:17

Potentially not, once they have been in the country long enough and start claiming benefits. And even if they are not eligible for benefits, the kind of immigration was have is people bringing their larger families and then elderly relatives with them. So they are a million miles from being net contributors, even with council tax.

An UK citizen bringing their spouse to UK is already difficult. Visa holders that wouldn't be considered net contributers bringing extended family is even more difficult.

Grow123 · 31/07/2025 08:50

Platosrevenge · 30/07/2025 09:23

Hang on. Hasn’t immigration legislation changed recently ? You have to earn >£30k and can’t bring dependents.

~£42k or going rate. Which ever is higher. And has to be on different shortage lists. Health care and education>£25k or going rate. For young people/stem/ >£33k.

Care workers, senior care workers or medium skilled workers can't bring dependants. Students doing phD and highly skilled workers can apply to have dependants come with them. It is possible to apply for elderly parents to come if they don't have anyone else and you'll be a carer. But it really isn't easy and you can't bring a large extended family. We have been looking into a route to live with my partner in UK so I've been reading a bit about this. And it ain't easy.

Perfectlystill · 31/07/2025 08:53

Immigration is not the answer to our low birth rate.

Jennps · 31/07/2025 09:08

Grow123 · 31/07/2025 08:28

An UK citizen bringing their spouse to UK is already difficult. Visa holders that wouldn't be considered net contributers bringing extended family is even more difficult.

Clearly not difficult enough. Millions come in that way.

Blackcordoroys · 31/07/2025 09:10

The average care worker on a visa brings 3 family members (all to be supported by one low earner). It’s not that difficult! I know a PhD student who brought 5 family members - PhD stipends are about £18k.

Digdongdoo · 31/07/2025 09:12

Blackcordoroys · 31/07/2025 09:10

The average care worker on a visa brings 3 family members (all to be supported by one low earner). It’s not that difficult! I know a PhD student who brought 5 family members - PhD stipends are about £18k.

Well they can't do that any more can they?

Blackcordoroys · 31/07/2025 09:13

Didn’t you say health workers earning more than £25k still can?

Blackcordoroys · 31/07/2025 09:13

Sorry, that wasn’t you. Apols

Grow123 · 31/07/2025 09:18

Jennps · 31/07/2025 09:08

Clearly not difficult enough. Millions come in that way.

Would love to know how. Could take some pointers for myself 😉

Grow123 · 31/07/2025 09:30

Blackcordoroys · 31/07/2025 09:10

The average care worker on a visa brings 3 family members (all to be supported by one low earner). It’s not that difficult! I know a PhD student who brought 5 family members - PhD stipends are about £18k.

Care workers no longer can bring dependants. PhD students still can. But dependants can't file for any benefits.