Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

I’ve easily found £30bn of savings, so why can’t the government do this?

462 replies

OwnGravityField · 02/11/2025 10:36

How about this state pension adjustment proposal?

Currently, the state pension system pays the same to everyone, even to households with very large private pensions and investment incomes. Much of this money ends up funding luxuries.

The proposal is simple:
*full SP for everyone who depends on it (60% of pensioners)
*households with more than £12,000 a year from private pensions, work, or investments have 50p of SP withdrawn for every £1 above that level, up to the value of the pension itself
*A quarter of pensioners would only have a modest reduction, and only the wealthiest 15% would no longer receive a publicly funded pension they do not need.

I used chatGPT to do the calculations.

Savings? THIRTY BILLION A YEAR

That’s 1% of GDP

List of things that could improve?

restored trust between generations so young taxpayers see their money spent on genuine need, not luxury.

national renewal: homes, NHS, lower childcare costs, investment in schools, training, the police force. It could be used to help families who are struggling with mortgage costs.

re-directing spending from low-value consumption (luxuries, imports) to investment (homes, healthcare, infrastructure) improves living standards

Positive effect on the bond markets, sterling value, credit-rating agencies, inflation trends, reduction in government debt - the UK really really needs this right now

I’d absolutely get up off my bum and vote for a party that proposed this. Would you?

OP posts:
rwalker · 02/11/2025 11:01

arethereanyleftatall · 02/11/2025 10:57

Whenever people come up with these ideas, they completely forget to factor in that people will change their behaviour accordingly. You have based your sums on the assumption that if you did this, then everyone would continue as they are. But of course, they wouldn’t. Those whose private pensions are the same ish, would just not bother saving.

Exactly my guess is OP is on universal credit so wouldn’t even consider this a problem

SugarandSpiceandAllThingsNaice · 02/11/2025 11:01

OwnGravityField · 02/11/2025 11:00

With the SP on top that’s 25k a year. The amount the government expects families to live off.

That’s not how you wrote it, you didn’t say households at £25k and above…

OwnGravityField · 02/11/2025 11:02

It seems most of the ‘no thanks crowd’ think they’re in the top 15% wealthiest of would be pensioners.

Please read the proposal. It’s a tapered reduction, not a massive sledgehammer being applied.

OP posts:
Jabtastic · 02/11/2025 11:02

I'm currently working in a high demand role part time in spite of being disabled. One of the main reasons I'm still there is for my pension in case (low chance) I survive long enough to claim it. Some people with my condition don't work, especially in the later stages, and survive on benefits. Should I copy them? Just give up work and expect other people to take care of me?

People need a reason to work hard. Britain has a productivity problem because too many people sit back waiting for other people to fund them. People who work hard are penalised to fund people who don't work at all or work less than 16 hours. No wonder our country is getting poorer and poorer.

Tryingatleast · 02/11/2025 11:03

Honestly just wondering what age you are op?

BadgernTheGarden · 02/11/2025 11:03

OwnGravityField · 02/11/2025 10:36

How about this state pension adjustment proposal?

Currently, the state pension system pays the same to everyone, even to households with very large private pensions and investment incomes. Much of this money ends up funding luxuries.

The proposal is simple:
*full SP for everyone who depends on it (60% of pensioners)
*households with more than £12,000 a year from private pensions, work, or investments have 50p of SP withdrawn for every £1 above that level, up to the value of the pension itself
*A quarter of pensioners would only have a modest reduction, and only the wealthiest 15% would no longer receive a publicly funded pension they do not need.

I used chatGPT to do the calculations.

Savings? THIRTY BILLION A YEAR

That’s 1% of GDP

List of things that could improve?

restored trust between generations so young taxpayers see their money spent on genuine need, not luxury.

national renewal: homes, NHS, lower childcare costs, investment in schools, training, the police force. It could be used to help families who are struggling with mortgage costs.

re-directing spending from low-value consumption (luxuries, imports) to investment (homes, healthcare, infrastructure) improves living standards

Positive effect on the bond markets, sterling value, credit-rating agencies, inflation trends, reduction in government debt - the UK really really needs this right now

I’d absolutely get up off my bum and vote for a party that proposed this. Would you?

One way of guaranteeing losing the next election. Pensioners have already been hit by pushing back retirement age. Why not means test the NHS and schools, if you can pay for treatment or to send your kids to school, you pay. Make the unemployed work, reduce benefit payments, stop people having children they can't afford? Plenty of ways to save money, as long as it doesn't affect the person making the proposal (or not yet anyway).

OwnGravityField · 02/11/2025 11:03

SugarandSpiceandAllThingsNaice · 02/11/2025 11:01

That’s not how you wrote it, you didn’t say households at £25k and above…

I’m going to have to adjust the wording on the proposal!

OP posts:
Worjnd93djs · 02/11/2025 11:04

arethereanyleftatall · 02/11/2025 10:57

Whenever people come up with these ideas, they completely forget to factor in that people will change their behaviour accordingly. You have based your sums on the assumption that if you did this, then everyone would continue as they are. But of course, they wouldn’t. Those whose private pensions are the same ish, would just not bother saving.

Exactly this. It’s such a ridiculous idea and those coming up for retirement should have the option of not saving instead of having their state pension reduced after decades of funding others getting a full state pension whilst being sensible.

Also why should those that decide to just not bother with putting money into a pension choosing to fritter it instead be rewarded?

We went without to pay off our mortgage and into a pension when others around us decided to over borrow, and waste money on endless DIY, car schemes and holidays. Why should our careful budgeting be penalised and frittering be rewarded?

arethereanyleftatall · 02/11/2025 11:04

drspouse · 02/11/2025 10:47

You are aware that Chat GPT makes things up?

I was just about to say that. I had no idea that anyone thought chat GPT was always accurate!

Jabtastic · 02/11/2025 11:05

Like others, I'm interested in why you left Universal Credit out of your AI calculations. It seems like an obvious starting point. Why are able bodied people working part time hours funded by disabled people working full time hours?

OnlyOnAFriday · 02/11/2025 11:05

To be honest I’d be very pissed off. I’ve worked my fingers to the bone since I was still at school. I’ve saved hard, invested in private pension, not taken holidays, not had new cars, stayed in a small house. I’ve paid a lot of tax, never had a single penny from the government apart from child benefit (and then that got stopped as dh earned too much).

Ive made plans for my retirement based on including a state pension (I’m in my 50s now). Why should I be penalised when people who either haven’t worked or haven’t saved, who may not have paid as much tax get given it all. There’s too many shirkers in this country who are out for everything and don’t work. That needs looking at first.

How about means testing some benefits like PIP, winter fuel allowance , child tax credits (no idea if the latter already is means tested). I mean if you’re going to means test pensions I think you have to means test everything.

SugarandSpiceandAllThingsNaice · 02/11/2025 11:05

OwnGravityField · 02/11/2025 11:03

I’m going to have to adjust the wording on the proposal!

Any thoughts on those of us who paid voluntary NICs? By law we should be refunded them plus compound interest.

Worjnd93djs · 02/11/2025 11:05

OwnGravityField · 02/11/2025 11:02

It seems most of the ‘no thanks crowd’ think they’re in the top 15% wealthiest of would be pensioners.

Please read the proposal. It’s a tapered reduction, not a massive sledgehammer being applied.

Anything over £12 k a year you said. That’s what the majority would get and it’s hardly anything.

Bringemout · 02/11/2025 11:06

I’d vote for it. People aren’t being honest about the fiscal reality, we can’t have an never ending entitlements whilst trying to squeeze money out of a smaller and smaller group of net contributors. It’s a fantasy.

arethereanyleftatall · 02/11/2025 11:07

Frankinator · 02/11/2025 10:51

And the government would just bring that in overnight would it? Presumably not, so you’d get literally hundreds or thousands of doctors / teachers take early retirement so that they still got the state pension….

This is a really valid point.

InMyOpenOnion · 02/11/2025 11:07

ChatGPT really isn't reliable when it comes to statistics. It doesn't check the authenticity, bias or accuracy of the data it pulls. So yes, it will furnish you with some eloquent claptrap, but a lot of it is wildly inaccurate.

Anyway, that aside, what it doesn't predict is people adapting their behaviour to their own advantage. People would just stop paying into a private pension and either fritter that money away on fun stuff, or invest it elsewhere. Then you're back to paying everyone a state pension.

OwnGravityField · 02/11/2025 11:08

rwalker · 02/11/2025 11:01

Exactly my guess is OP is on universal credit so wouldn’t even consider this a problem

Actually, no, I’d totally be affected by it. I’d be in the 85% with modest or no reduction in state pension. Based on my calcs, I’d probably lose a few hundred a year of SP. I’m ok with that. I’d rather my children had a decent future.

OP posts:
AmberSpy · 02/11/2025 11:08

If only it had ever occurred to Rachel Reeves to use ChatGPT to formulate complex economic policy! We'd all be living in a land of milk and honey by now!

Honestly OP, it works by scraping masses of data and repeating it back to you. It's not a reliable source and certainly not capable of coming up with reliable policy.

OwnGravityField · 02/11/2025 11:08

InMyOpenOnion · 02/11/2025 11:07

ChatGPT really isn't reliable when it comes to statistics. It doesn't check the authenticity, bias or accuracy of the data it pulls. So yes, it will furnish you with some eloquent claptrap, but a lot of it is wildly inaccurate.

Anyway, that aside, what it doesn't predict is people adapting their behaviour to their own advantage. People would just stop paying into a private pension and either fritter that money away on fun stuff, or invest it elsewhere. Then you're back to paying everyone a state pension.

The data sources were legit, like the DWP.

OP posts:
childofthe607080s · 02/11/2025 11:08

Only if you give me back my state pension investment please because otherwise it’s theft - pay your stamp to get your pension…

rwalker · 02/11/2025 11:08

OwnGravityField · 02/11/2025 11:02

It seems most of the ‘no thanks crowd’ think they’re in the top 15% wealthiest of would be pensioners.

Please read the proposal. It’s a tapered reduction, not a massive sledgehammer being applied.

Your completely ignoring the numerous post
saying they would ether stop paying private pensions or reduce it as they would only be marginally better off so you could spend or save that money instead

OwnGravityField · 02/11/2025 11:10

AmberSpy · 02/11/2025 11:08

If only it had ever occurred to Rachel Reeves to use ChatGPT to formulate complex economic policy! We'd all be living in a land of milk and honey by now!

Honestly OP, it works by scraping masses of data and repeating it back to you. It's not a reliable source and certainly not capable of coming up with reliable policy.

I’m just a humble citizen, not a well paid policy wonk surrounded by a team taxpayer funded economists. Sorry!

OP posts:
Summerhillsquare · 02/11/2025 11:10

Can I introduce you to the concept of income tax?

I would welcome more more wealth taxes. But theres an army of people wound up by social media and AI to scream against taxing the rich, or even withdrawing extra benefits from them eg winter fuel payment.

SushiForMe · 02/11/2025 11:11

IMHO this mentality of poor vs rich all is exactly what is wrong currently in the UK: what’s the point of working hard and contributing if you just end up with the same as people who minimised income and/or spent all their money instead of saving.

See also underfunded state school or private at v high cost, or underfunded NHS or private also at v high cost.
How other countries do it: state pension indexed on earnings when active (so there is a motivation to earn more: you will get more pension), free services (pension, school, health) but possibility to go private by paying a reasonable amount because the state still pays the ‘basic’ amount and you just top up: the free services have more capacity.

You need people to have ambition, not just hope that a minority will be so motivated to live above the basic standard that they are willing to pay all their lives for the majority that doesn’t contribute their share.

OwnGravityField · 02/11/2025 11:11

Bringemout · 02/11/2025 11:06

I’d vote for it. People aren’t being honest about the fiscal reality, we can’t have an never ending entitlements whilst trying to squeeze money out of a smaller and smaller group of net contributors. It’s a fantasy.

Thank you! I just think it’s awful so many families and children are suffering needlessly.

OP posts: