To think this is a real possibility in the future? (State pension)

[TheOtherBoleynSister]

I am 34 and ever since I started working people have said don’t rely on there being a state pension. So I’m pretty pessimistic about it.

I honestly believe that for people under 40, the universal state pension (paid regardless of income or capital to those who have paid NI for a certain number of years) won’t exist. That there will be no qualifying ‘age’, and instead older people will be the same as the rest of the population when it comes to benefit eligibility ie. Have to be certified as too ill or physically unable to work, and get UC if income is low and savings are below £16k. In other words, being a certain age won’t entitle us to any benefit like it does now.

In this awful very bleak future, older people who can no longer work, who have savings/money above the threshold or private pensions, will need to rely solely on the money they have unless or until they get to the point where they now qualify for benefits.

Of course I don’t want this to happen, but with all the stories about the cost of pensions and the rising number of older people it feels inevitable. But the reality is many people’s private pensions won’t be nearly enough to last (but maybe they will be forced to spend them before any help), and there’s also talk in the press of some wanting to do away with ‘generous’ public sector pensions (which are not as generous as they used to be, albeit they are better than a lot of private schemes).

I am quite aware of pensions due to older relatives and friends who are of that age, but many people my age haven’t a clue about them or how they work. I do think we will be seeing a real disaster in less than 30 years, but people don’t care as it’s someone else’s/ tomorrow’s problem.

I think with the push on workplace enrolment the SP may ultimately move to means tested. It will take forever to actually implement this though…no government will want to risk what little credibility they have left in imposing it.

All you can do really is prepare as best you can for your own financial future…if you have kids, teach them.

No, it will be worse. Much, much worse.

AI is being developed to replace human beings, so that humans are no longer needed. People making all the money (e.g. big US tech) aren’t going to be paying out universal basic income.

I think it will be means tested, but at first the threshold will be very high, meaning few people are affected, maybe something like £100k of income per year. That way there'd be relatively little moaning as so few people affected and there'd be the narrative that those with incomes over £100k don't need the state pension anyway.

Then, of course, the threshold wouldn't change, so fiscal drag would kick in drawing more people into breaching the threshold and not being eligible for state pension.

The government of the day could also start to reduce the threshold, again, on the grounds that, say, people with incomes over £70k don't need the state pension, and so it goes on.

Little and often is the way! Fiscal drag is absolutely loved by politicians, as are smaller incremental changes they hope no one notices and relatively few people care about enough to make a fuss.

I think we'll end up turning the clock back to "localism" where people worked, lived, etc locally, and worked doing more "crafty" things, farming, tending to animals, tending small patches of crops, etc. I.e. back towards self sufficiency. Society will be polarised, at the one end, the "high tech" richer side of things, and at the other end, a basic/subsistence level of living.

No, that won't happen. No Government's going to axe the State Pension. That would be suicidal for any Party. What Governments will do is keep raising the retirement age, so people'll have less and less chance of ever having access to it. The latest reports are suggesting it'll be 72 or possibly even 75 in the not too distant future.

I don't get it - the bits you've quoted support what I've said, rather than disprove it - even the 'moderate' forecast is still higher than average household income, and is based on the assumption that people having paid off their mortgage.

So on a very basic level, why would the AVERAGE couple, with an AVERAGE household income, need MORE, or even the same, amount of yearly income in retirement to live the same lifestyle, in terms of comfort, disposable income, etc, than when they were in their 30s/40s, working full time and paying off/out on said mortgage, £100s in childcare costs, community costs, student loans, etc...? It doesn't make sense.

Work is conducive to good mental health. Stuck at home gaming is not!

Agree, which is why the lack of job opportunities for young people entering the job market is bound to have an effect. It’s easy to become depressed if you’re broke, unemployed and applying to hundreds of jobs with no luck.

HRTWT. I think removing the SP would be suicidal for whoever did it. I think the triple lock will be removed imminently, the 'benefit' will increase annually by as little as each gov can get away with and, eventually it will be pretty worthless in the scheme of things - and pensioners will pay tax on this pretty worthless amount (making it worthless). Anybody who has no other form of income will be supported by a more generous pension credit while everyone else will buy a book of first-class stamps with it.

OP, people used to say this in the early 1980s too, over 40 years ago, so I don’t think it will change apart from the age going up as we all live longer.

When the state pension was first introduced with a starting age of 65 for men, the average life expectancy of a man was 57! It was expected that most people would not live long enough to get to retirement!

I think successive governments should (if they have any brains) gradually increase workplace and private pensions so state pensions can be reduced.

But look how Reeves/Labour have made pensions less attractive recently so I don’t think they will actually do it.

Governments are too often short-sighted thinking only of grabbing money now for the short-term instead of long-term planning for the future. Always completely useless self-interest from all parties.

It’s going to change society but if you think it’s going to create a beautiful and amazing life, giving free money for all basic needs to the man on the street you are very naive.

Perhaps. But most other benefits are now means tested - some are which didn’t used to be (like child benefit), I don’t think it’s completely beyond the realms of possibility for the state pension to become so in the future.

I think the reasons it hasn’t become so yet are because:

1. Pensioners (and those near pension age) are a massive voting block
2. Any sniff of changes gets a shitload of press, just look at the winter fuel fallout. That’s because the readers of the ‘big’ newspapers are largely pensioners
3. Many people over 55 or so don’t have private pensions as they were never opted in, or they have very small pots

If they announce today that it will be means tested for, let’s say, anyone born after 1980, I don’t think there will be much of a fallout or protests. It wouldn’t affect current pensioners or those coming up to it so they won’t care, and the ‘millennial generation’ is used to things, and expect things, being changed. Speaking as someone of that generation, I think my generation would just shrug and add it to the list - ‘we’ care more about house prices and student loans repayments at the moment, so ‘we’ probably would not realise the implications until we are well into our 50s.

The Government will divide and conquer. They'll give one group of future pensioners (say those due to retire in ten years) the full pension with no means test, and make everyone who retires after that do a means test. The people who really need to worry will be too young to avail of the full pension old to build a private pension. The much younger people will think they've plenty of time...but by the time they reach retirement the rules will have changed again.

I don’t believe that, no. I think we’re all bang in trouble.

For the past few years now pensions have increased by more than my salary in percentage terms!

There are no others. We’ve already had virtually all the North Sea oil. There’s none left. We completely squandered that opportunity.

Wow what is your salary? Pensions are only 12k a year.

Not accurate. DD's ex-FIL is in exploration business and says there's much untapped oil around British Isles. And we haven't even begun to look properly into renewable (wind, water, waves).

Sometimes I truly despair at the illiteracy in this place.

They mean in % times. The poster’s salary may have only increased by 1% (or not at all) whereas pensions are going up 4.8% this year.

Well experts disagree with him so I think I’ll put my trust in them.

I work with the public. Despite how many marathon running, working full time, gym bunny 80 year olds mumsnet seems to know, the amount of 75+ year olds who would be capable of working full time or even at all isn’t that high. My MIL is 73, has a deteriorating eye condition, arthritis and has had two knee replacements. She’s had to stop driving. Who is employing her? My FIL is 74 and is incredibly deaf and is awaiting back surgery. I see this kind of thing repeated daily in my work with the public. Even just older people’s memories and ability to pick up new information. I’m not criticising older people, it’s just a fact that it can be more of a struggle.

Then you have the issues with driving. Everyone on mn wants older people banned from driving. How are many of these people getting to work? And as others have pointed out where will the jobs be for young people if everyone is working until 75?

They could raise the pension age to 90 if they wanted. All that will happen is the majority of 70+ year olds will be on disability or sickness benefits instead.

Yes, but disability and sickness benefits will be cheaper than the state pension. And they are only be accessible to those on a low/no income and with low savings (currently the cut off is £16k).

I think my biggest fear about the state pension age rising older and older is actually being able to find employment when I’m in my 60s. God it’s hard enough now when you’re young. If you get made redundant 60+ you’re going to have a difficult time finding work.

In the case of Teachers eg, it certainly was a Union which campaigned for equal pay ie the NUT (National Union of Teachers.) My mother was involved for many many years from her beginnings as a Teacher in 1926 until the 1950s when equal pay was brought in in stages.

It is also true that their campaign caused a breakaway Union to be formed ie the National Association of School MASTERS ( the NAS) which campaigned against it. They were eventually forced to allow women into the Union because of Equality legislation and it became the NASUWT ( Union of Women Teachers) though why any women would join is a mystery.

Many Unions have campaigned for equal pay for women. I believe the current financial problems of Birmingham Council are partly as a result of being forced to grant equal pay for women.

I think you’ve got a point. You only have to look at the changes they made to the BSP which is now nowhere near in line with other countries. And it’s the same sort of thing, people think it’s too far in the future or will never apply to them so there’s no major fallout.