Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Who is going to pay for your state pension/ care in old age?

796 replies

itsadlibitum · 01/04/2026 15:38

Apparently birth rates are falling, and this is putting future pensions (and I would imagine general tax income) in jeopardy as the population will proportionally age.

What's the solution? Should we just write off our paid for "right" to a state pension and state support for care in older age?

Does this change your view on public investment in supporting people to have children if you otherwise thought this was a personal choice and you should support/ pay for your own children?

AIBU to think that NI contributions for "pension" is essentially government mandated mis-selling and state pension will go out the window in the next few decades?

OP posts:
EightSteps · 03/04/2026 11:10

We can't turn back time but we absolutely should be making sure people are educated. How, I don't know.

Katypp · 03/04/2026 11:20

ObelixtheGaul · 03/04/2026 10:16

Well, no. You were a bit more secure in the knowledge that you'd reap the benefits. There's much less complaining about tax when you can see your doctor on the day you actually need to, rather than having to wait two months or sit in A & E for 13 hours. When NHS dental care was the norm, when there were generally a lot more support services, day centres, council run care homes.

Nobody minded paying a higher tax so much when you weren't also paying off a massive student loan because the state had not only paid for your degree, it had also given some people grant money to help with living expenses whilst doing it. My husband did his HND when you could still claim dole in the summer holidays!

Nobody minded paying a higher percent NI contribution because you knew your turn would come, even if it did end up being a few years later. Millennials and younger have no such knowledge, but they still have to pay.

It's about what you get for those taxes today, versus what you used to get. That's why people are complaining. More in, less out.

Negative equity
Higher taxes
Mortgage rates doubling within a few months
Three months maternity leave
No subsidised childcare
No flexible working
No paternity leave
No WFH

Oh yes, we had it a lot easier back in the fabulous 1980s and 1990s.

But of course, we need to go along with the rhetoric that today's workers have a harder time than any generation before them. Or else we are greedy boomers (I'm not, by the way, have another 9 years to work)

Every generation has their struggles, there is nothing unique about being hard-up when you are raising your family.

Dfdd · 03/04/2026 11:26

dinbin · 03/04/2026 11:01

A small amount started at 18 until retirement at 67 does build.

How many 18 yrs olds can afford to save for a pension today? All my money at that age went towards supporting myself at uni

What about when they graduate from university are working full time, and have entered the world of work to begin their careers?

dinbin · 03/04/2026 11:27

Dfdd · 03/04/2026 11:26

What about when they graduate from university are working full time, and have entered the world of work to begin their careers?

What when they are paying high rents & trying to save for a house?

ApriloNeil2026 · 03/04/2026 11:27

Dfdd · 03/04/2026 11:26

What about when they graduate from university are working full time, and have entered the world of work to begin their careers?

then companies only want to pay nmw

itsadlibitum · 03/04/2026 11:28

ObelixtheGaul · 03/04/2026 10:16

Well, no. You were a bit more secure in the knowledge that you'd reap the benefits. There's much less complaining about tax when you can see your doctor on the day you actually need to, rather than having to wait two months or sit in A & E for 13 hours. When NHS dental care was the norm, when there were generally a lot more support services, day centres, council run care homes.

Nobody minded paying a higher tax so much when you weren't also paying off a massive student loan because the state had not only paid for your degree, it had also given some people grant money to help with living expenses whilst doing it. My husband did his HND when you could still claim dole in the summer holidays!

Nobody minded paying a higher percent NI contribution because you knew your turn would come, even if it did end up being a few years later. Millennials and younger have no such knowledge, but they still have to pay.

It's about what you get for those taxes today, versus what you used to get. That's why people are complaining. More in, less out.

This is an excellent point.

I am not sure that many people are naturally entirely altruistic. At least not as many as claim to be. The social contract was pay your taxes and you’ll be looked after with healthcare, pension, safe country try, decent roads, schools etc. As time goes on one side of that contract is increased in value (taxes) while the returns become less and less and it makes people angry and feel ripped off. The social contact of the “welfare” system has been slowly eroded through austerity and it’s no longer looking like such a good deal. No wonder people are angry. Especially when they are looking at others who are are still getting the good deal.

That isn’t selfish, that’s fair enough.

OP posts:
LiviaDrusillaAugusta · 03/04/2026 11:29

Ihatetomatoes · 03/04/2026 11:10

I have no idea how old you are. You might already be retired? Most people have some agency over an entire lifetime. With only yourself and no children to pay for it's sad that in a lifetime there was no tiny amount to put by for retirement.

In real I meet a variety of people some provided well others a bit and some never worked and are reliant on the state of which seem happy to do that.

I’m 55 and I won’t be retiring. As above I have plan B. I genuinely didn’t realise that working and paying tax all my life without having children made me so unworthy of any assistance.

I also didn’t realise I’m the only childfree person on the planet who is not sitting on wads of cash.

Anyway I won’t be taking a penny from you or your children so don’t worry about it

dinbin · 03/04/2026 11:31

Negative equity
Higher taxes
Mortgage rates doubling within a few months
Three months maternity leave
No subsidised childcare
No flexible working
No paternity leave
No WFH

You can’t just cherry pick the bad from the 80s & 90s. There was also huge equity gains & wage growth, more social housing, more dc.
What were the higher taxes?
Childcare wasn’t such a pressing issue as fewer mothers worked full time & laws weren’t so stringent.
Lots of workers today can’t work remotely or flexibly.

Every generation has their struggles, there is nothing unique about being hard-up when you are raising your family

It was never easy but things improved for many. That’s the difference now, things aren’t improving.

Just imagine what you would have to earn today to have a 3/4 bedroom home mortgage free, with 3 dc & be able to retire at 60 like many of my parents generation.

LiviaDrusillaAugusta · 03/04/2026 11:31

Dfdd · 03/04/2026 11:26

What about when they graduate from university are working full time, and have entered the world of work to begin their careers?

Well not everyone can earn such a huge wage as you reckon your son and his mates are on.

Although it doesn’t help the argument that the poor graduates won’t be able to buy their own houses etc so that’s a positive

dinbin · 03/04/2026 11:31

Nobody minded paying a higher percent NI contribution because you knew your turn would come, even if it did end up being a few years later. Millennials and younger have no such knowledge, but they still have to pay.
It's about what you get for those taxes today, versus what you used to get. That's why people are complaining. More in, less out.

Yes, this is the crux of it.

Dfdd · 03/04/2026 11:33

Ihatetomatoes · 03/04/2026 11:10

I have no idea how old you are. You might already be retired? Most people have some agency over an entire lifetime. With only yourself and no children to pay for it's sad that in a lifetime there was no tiny amount to put by for retirement.

In real I meet a variety of people some provided well others a bit and some never worked and are reliant on the state of which seem happy to do that.

PP is 55 and still working and from her posts I understand she's had genuine struggles and difficulties in life.

LiviaDrusillaAugusta · 03/04/2026 11:33

itsadlibitum · 03/04/2026 11:28

This is an excellent point.

I am not sure that many people are naturally entirely altruistic. At least not as many as claim to be. The social contract was pay your taxes and you’ll be looked after with healthcare, pension, safe country try, decent roads, schools etc. As time goes on one side of that contract is increased in value (taxes) while the returns become less and less and it makes people angry and feel ripped off. The social contact of the “welfare” system has been slowly eroded through austerity and it’s no longer looking like such a good deal. No wonder people are angry. Especially when they are looking at others who are are still getting the good deal.

That isn’t selfish, that’s fair enough.

I agree. I didn’t want children and thought at least that was my way of doing my bit. Are we to be believe that anybody has children because of the benefit to society? Because they don’t.

Ihatetomatoes · 03/04/2026 11:35

LiviaDrusillaAugusta · 03/04/2026 11:29

I’m 55 and I won’t be retiring. As above I have plan B. I genuinely didn’t realise that working and paying tax all my life without having children made me so unworthy of any assistance.

I also didn’t realise I’m the only childfree person on the planet who is not sitting on wads of cash.

Anyway I won’t be taking a penny from you or your children so don’t worry about it

If you live in the UK you will qualify for assistance if you need it, just like everyone else, with or without children, on top of any basic state pension.

Why would you be the only child free person needing assistance, lots of people claim benefits, whether they had children or not.

I'm not worried about you taking from me or my children.

itsadlibitum · 03/04/2026 11:35

LiviaDrusillaAugusta · 03/04/2026 11:33

I agree. I didn’t want children and thought at least that was my way of doing my bit. Are we to be believe that anybody has children because of the benefit to society? Because they don’t.

No, I don’t think people have children because they think it’ll benefit society.

BUT having children IS beneficial to society. It’s simple biology, procreation is necessary for a species to continue. And therefore for society to continue.

it’s not just pensions, if people just stopped having children there would be no next generation to do the work once the current generation is too old.

OP posts:
dinbin · 03/04/2026 11:36

BUT having children IS beneficial to society. It’s simple biology, procreation is necessary for a species to continue. And therefore for society to continue

Yes & societies don’t progress & evolve without new blood.

LiviaDrusillaAugusta · 03/04/2026 11:39

Dfdd · 03/04/2026 11:33

PP is 55 and still working and from her posts I understand she's had genuine struggles and difficulties in life.

I hadnt realised how badly I had run my life. I thought I had done okay until you pointed out the mistakes I made, and that I should have thought about all that when I was 18 etc. It’s made me feel very small and stupid.

So thanks for that anyway.

On the plus side I won’t be retiring or taking a penny so it’s all good.

LiviaDrusillaAugusta · 03/04/2026 11:40

itsadlibitum · 03/04/2026 11:35

No, I don’t think people have children because they think it’ll benefit society.

BUT having children IS beneficial to society. It’s simple biology, procreation is necessary for a species to continue. And therefore for society to continue.

it’s not just pensions, if people just stopped having children there would be no next generation to do the work once the current generation is too old.

And I thought working all my life and paying tax etc so that others could have children and educate them etc was a good thing.

Apparently not.

itsadlibitum · 03/04/2026 11:42

LiviaDrusillaAugusta · 03/04/2026 11:40

And I thought working all my life and paying tax etc so that others could have children and educate them etc was a good thing.

Apparently not.

Why not?

Btw I am not arguing for PP’s suggestion people with children should get more. I am just saying there is a benefit to society from people choosing to have children. And in my view society therefore should support them in that.

OP posts:
ObelixtheGaul · 03/04/2026 11:42

Dfdd · 03/04/2026 10:36

Compulsory enrollment has been a great benefit and has helped people.

Don't most people however have a plan career wise and life wise. I've studied X,Y,Z and I have these skills. This is what I can do to best maximise my income. This is how much I'm going to save, invest and plan for me retirement.
Not just "be happy", live off vibes and expect the government to take care of it? - barring major physical or mental health issues preventing work of course.

If you've paid in to the state pension via NI you definitely deserve it. But in the long run we should transition out of this.

Edited

Of course, but life doesn't always work out how you planned, job markets change, needs change, situations change. Unforseen circumstances can derail the best laid plans. People can take financial advice (remember endowment mortgages?) that turns out to be catastrophic, etc.

Yes, planning gives you a better chance, but the best laid plans are subject to change. I see a lot of people on MN, for example, smugly claiming they have saved for their old age. Most people have no idea just how much nursing care can cost. My parents have worked, saved and invested. Done all the right things, have a comfortable retirement, but if one of them needs care before the other, so they can't sell their home as one needs to live in it, all their carefully built up savings will last about a year. Their hard-earned company pensions don't add up to the £1,500 a week that it would cost for residential care plus the living costs of the one left at home. Hopefully, this won't be the situation, but if it happened, yes, they'd need state intervention. I will likely step in and look after them myself if I am physically ably, but that will affect my income and my carefully laid plans. I have just seen this exact scenario play out with close relatives, all of whom had plans, savings, investments.

The vast majority of people who have worked, saved and invested won't have double-income six figure salaries. Not because they have been idle, or haven't planned, but because most jobs aren't in the top earning percentage. They just aren't. And the truth is, unless you really are in one of the few professions that put you at senior level wages, you won't have enough money to support more than a year or two in a nursing home, paying for yourself. Some people can live for years needing 24 hour care.

Ihatetomatoes · 03/04/2026 11:43

LiviaDrusillaAugusta · 03/04/2026 11:39

I hadnt realised how badly I had run my life. I thought I had done okay until you pointed out the mistakes I made, and that I should have thought about all that when I was 18 etc. It’s made me feel very small and stupid.

So thanks for that anyway.

On the plus side I won’t be retiring or taking a penny so it’s all good.

I apologise if I made you feel small and stupid, (although this comment was directed at another). I've also suggested, that in a lifetime without the expense of children there must have been some money free to save. I believe that is true, but often people don't have the knowledge or information to do that.

LiviaDrusillaAugusta · 03/04/2026 11:44

itsadlibitum · 03/04/2026 11:42

Why not?

Btw I am not arguing for PP’s suggestion people with children should get more. I am just saying there is a benefit to society from people choosing to have children. And in my view society therefore should support them in that.

And that’s fine but that has morphed into me being incredibly stupid and selfish and not deserving a pension.

Dfdd · 03/04/2026 11:44

dinbin · 03/04/2026 11:27

What when they are paying high rents & trying to save for a house?

Yes. The grads I know still do this. How difficult is a 4% contribution? Things are pricey in London but people still manage. People still have savings.

If they live elsewhere rents would be cheaper.

dinbin · 03/04/2026 11:44

Great post @ObelixtheGaul

Ihatetomatoes · 03/04/2026 11:45

LiviaDrusillaAugusta · 03/04/2026 11:44

And that’s fine but that has morphed into me being incredibly stupid and selfish and not deserving a pension.

You deserve the state pension as everyone does, why would you not. You'd also get pension credit help if on a low pension, so potentially free rent and council tax etc.

LiviaDrusillaAugusta · 03/04/2026 11:46

Ihatetomatoes · 03/04/2026 11:43

I apologise if I made you feel small and stupid, (although this comment was directed at another). I've also suggested, that in a lifetime without the expense of children there must have been some money free to save. I believe that is true, but often people don't have the knowledge or information to do that.

It was @Dfdd who has made me realise what a total fucking loser I am.

But do you really believe that all childfree people are minted?