To be angry with people who describe the old age pension as a "benefit"?

[FlubandSlub]

When I started my working life, aged 16, I entered into an agreement with the government for them to save my pension money for me. It was stated that it would be until I turned 60 which would be when I could starting drawing my old age pension. Even though I made my FULL pension payment contributions by the time I turned 51 the government has decided it will not abide by the original agreement and that it is going to keep MY money until I am 67. Probably hoping I will die before then.

Consider this, not only did I contribute to my pension, my employer did too. It totalled 15% of my income before taxes. If you averaged only £15 000 p a. over your working life, that's close to £220,500. Read that again. Did you see anywhere that the Government paid in one single penny?

We are talking about the money that I and my employer put in a Government bank to ensure that I would have a retirement pension. It was not money that the Government had any right to spend on other things! Upon reaching the age to take it back they've started to call the money we paid in a "benefit" !

If you calculate the future invested value of £2500 per year (yours & your employer's contribution) at a simple 5% interest (that's less than what the govtpays on the money that it borrows from overseas), after 49 years of working you'd have
£892,919.98.

This money was supposed to be in a securely locked box, not to be used as part of the Government's general funds.
Successive governments borrowed the money to spend on other things but that doesn't make my pension some kind of charity or handout!! If a private pension company did this we would sue them. Unfortunately the Government can legally rob us blind and get away with it

IT'S MY MONEY! IT IS NOT A BENEFIT!!

Each person can check their own state pension information here

Date due to be paid
How much due to be paid - However some people can claim other money on top, depending on their circumstances
Eg
Pension credit
Rent for accommodation
Council tax reduction
Attendance allowance

www.gov.uk/check-state-pension

Surely the actual issue is that it was set up by the government on the basis that you put in and you will receive when you retire but when it’s not actually invested and is based upon economy and government spending at some point it will fail and the people who have paid in will not receive a state pension. It’s a bad design that only works in a growing economy. I also think it’s frustrating when it’s described as a benefit as technically if they hadn’t taken that percentage and people had invested then it would achieve said pension for them and they wouldn’t be accused of being a drain on the economy that they’ve paid into all their lives. Otherwise just call it income tax rather than national insurance.

It was a few years ago now but it’s not changed. Unfortunately the people the DWP employ on the phones tend to be ‘street to seat’ whereas when I started (I was there for quite a long time), we had 13 weeks training!

To work your entire life, paying into a system under an agreed set of rules, only to have the goalposts moved and your own money described as a "handout" is incredibly frustrating. You have every right to be furious. It’s your money, earned and saved.

@the7capable7mom Well, if that had happened, it would be. But, as the last 14 pages have explained, none of it has happened.

She hasn't 'worked her entire life to then have the goalposts moved'.

Decades ago it was realised that people are living a lot longer than the population used to live to, when the system of benefits were first established and people paying taxes could no longer raise enough money to keep pensioners in a pension for 25 years plus. It was realised it couldn't be a sudden change, as you have tried to imply, so everyone was given 30 odd years notice that the ages we will start to receive our state pension was going to start being pushed back. Just as my dc in their 20s realise they are unlikely to get a state pension at 67 or 68, if at all, so they are making sure they pay into their private pensions NOW so there will be a pot to draw from in the future.

It’s your money, earned and saved.

Have you not read ANY of the posts on the last 14 pages, explaining that this is completely wrong / untrue / false / however you want to put it ?
Even if you were as ignorant as the OP about this subject at the beginning of the thread, surely you would have seen from what everyone has explained, that this is just not the case? If not, there is little point in repeating it to you.
I hope you don't spread such lies on your Instagram that you came on to advertise, as well.

That's a complete load of uninformed bollocks. Have you read and understood any of the many posts on here outlining how the state pension system and the NI contributions work?

I hope you aren't spouting this shit on your Instagram page, though I am sure you are.

Fully agree. I’d be embarrassed about posting such uninformed nonsense if I were the OP.

I'm sick to the back teeth of crap like the OP being shared on places like Facebook etc. I’m almost certain OP is on Facebook also sharing misinformation on small boats. Probably saying the small boat people are being given her pension money.

Low information people with megaphones are doing my head in and ruining our country.

Why are you being so snobby about benefits?
It is a benefit.
NICs are paid to benefit the current generation of pensioners

people live into their 80s and 90s

therefore it’s not feasible for them to retire at 60. That’s 20-30 years of pension?

we have more old than young

it has to change. Get over it

And some of those 90-year-olds will say "but we've worked hard aaaall our lives!" if any changes are proposed 🙄

Unfortunately, this is exactly how it is.
Pension is a benefit paid to the part of population that is currently eligible to it, paid by the rest of the population.
I'm 35 years away from the retirement age and strongly believe that pension will be means tested by then, and only people with no savings or equity will be eligible.
This is a reason why I decided against topping up my NI and paid into private pension instead.
There's absolutely no "agreement" that I'll get a state pension.

I' d be more inclined to support the grievances of pensioners if they hadn"t (and it is a majority) voted for making us poorer over the years.

If pensioners could kindly withdraw their objections to planning applications and support a return to the Single Market and Customs Union that would be a good start.

That is the problem. If everyone was treated equal it would be a fairer system. I.e. whether NHS, state pension, schools etc if you can only take a % relative to what you have paid in.

Governments need to communicate clearly and 40 years in advance if they intend to change the system. Without this how can people plan, it is just guess work and the goalposts keep moving.

"Yes, Madam, I know your five-year-old still has cancer but I think you'll find that having only worked for 10 years in a relatively low-paid job you've now used up all your family's contributions so there'll be no more chemo for her! Oh and your other kid will have to leave school. Yes, I know he's only seven, but this is a FAIR system where you can only take out a % relative to what you paid in. We're just treating everyone equal."

Yeah well they didn't and now status quo is unaffordable. It's too late.

Wow. MN is on fire with nonsense today.
You have a very distorted (read, incorrect) view of state pensions. You entered no such contract with the government and you do indeed now receive a ‘benefit’ of a state pension. This can (and probably will) be amended and/or withdrawn at any time, by any government.

A personal pension bears some of the characteristics you have mistakenly conferred upon the state version, but even they are subject to unpredictable admin fees, and the whim of any government to tax them in any way they wish.

Pensions are precarious and getting more precarious as time goes on.

You are aware that rich people can be disabled. Mumsnet always seems to imply it applies to the less well off.

If you haven't qualified you can always make additional contributions to qualify or go privately. I didn't say you would be banned from doing so. Just responsible for your own outcome, it wouldn't eliminate issues but it would encourage people to plan their life around different scenarios and maybe take out insurance as a safeguard option for any eventuality.

Another consequence of extending the working age (and it's relationship to benefits) would be the number of women becoming too sick and disabled to work but not able to draw a pension yet.

I've not been able to find the figures for this though so don't know how prevalent.

Brilliant. It could be a reverse but sadly it won't be. Yes, your benefit is being paid for by taxpayers and a little more awareness and a little less entitlement would be great. At the moment your benefit is triple locked and young families are capped. And you get winter fuel on an income higher than half the working population. Most NHS (about 80 oer cent) and social care goes on the over 60s so pensioners owe working people about 250 billion quid and tend to express their gratitude by objecting to any plans for more houses.

If you are a net contributor and are then expected to pay for your own social care the least you should expect is a state pension.

Why should it be a one way street for those that only take?

I can see that being used in a manifesto to come.

Everyone should have a pension. But they need to understand how it is paid for and that pensioners get far and away the better end of the public spending settlement.

Totally agree - I’m 63 and I despair of the ‘I’m all right Jack’ conversations I hear in cafes and buses from people my age and above that have owned their homes clearly for years and been out the workplace or business for many years. They had non contributory pensions, free higher education and in many cases social housing that they bought for peanuts. I realise not all pensioners are such GB news avid watchers of the ‘they are talking sense’ variety who think the country would be better handled by a load of old opportunistic oddballs and American style total free market lovers - and any deviance from thinking this way and we are all ‘leftists’ - and I’m not - very much in the middle.

@Hameth my understanding was that it is a contributory benefit - and those who contributed little NI personally over the years and that is lots and lots should thank their lucky stars that their ‘contributions’ were ‘covered off’ by others - my mother is a prime example - hasn’t worked since she was 43 for no good reason other than she didn’t need to and didn’t work that much before due to comfortably off husbands , but would be the first to moan about others getting stuff without having paid in.

I' d be more inclined to support the grievances of pensioners if they hadn"t (and it is a majority) voted for making us poorer over the years.

Well the fact that younger generations made it that much easier for them by conveniently not voting really needs to be borne in mind. These are the people who "couldn't be bothered" with politics and voting when they (and I) were 18 and now are whining.

I am very down on 30% of all whining in politics. Or maybe I should say 1 in 3 ?