Page 5 | To think pensions need huge reform?

aburrsir · 2026-08-12T12:32:38+00:00

With all of the recent chat over changing politicians and big ideas that don’t go anywhere, I can’t be the only one who thinks that someone needs to bite the bullet with pensions? It’s something ridiculous like 50% of the welfare budget annually, and this is never going to go away. IMO the government need to hike up retirement age and scrap the triple lock. There can be provisions made to go along with this to phase this in for those in genuine need (e.g. for the next 10 years those with no private pensions can get a top up to cover the transition period). I’d rather know “look you can’t retire until 75” now than this constant “it’s 67…. now wait it’s 68…..” that never ends. It seems that all governments are scared to do such a big change as it will piss off older people (who are the primary voting demographic) but something needs to change as this is just completely unsustainable long term. We’re better off making these changes to ensure the state pension can continue sustainably in the long term future rather than having this attitude of “as long as I’m alright I don’t care” We need a gov with long term planning goals and not just short term firefighting. AIBU?

Catza · 12/08/2026 16:10

aburrsir · 12/08/2026 13:42

Some people will, but some people will continue to work and thus continue to pay tax etc. The % who will claim sickness benefits etc is probably still worth making the change for the sake of the % who can carry on working

Show quote history

If pension age is moved to 75, then I will stop contributing to my private pension and enjoy extra £600 a month while I am still capable of enjoying it. Or use it to pay off my mortgage so I can survive on state pension or whatever benefits are in place should it be cancelled by the time I reach retirement age. I know way too many people who are struck by ill health or die within a year of their retirement. I am not gambling on living till my 90s to "use up" the pension pot I built up.
I am fairly certain most people would do the same when they are told they have to work till they are dead.

Owninterpreter · 12/08/2026 16:10

hahabahbag · 12/08/2026 16:02

The problem is that those over 50
will have made provisions based on getting a pension at x age. It was 60 when I started work, move us now 67, likely 68. Whilst I was young enough for the rise to 65 not to be an issue, if it was moved more than a year or 2 I’d be screwed because we have financial plans based on 67

Yes, the problem we have is we apparently need a quick fix for now as the country is struggling and a much longer term plan for the future that is sustainable.

Im suspicious the quick fix will be a small generation not getting enough notice to plan accordingly - with those older cushioned we cant let them starve and those younger properly forewarned with schemes set up.

When I started work pension age was 60 for women and lots of employers didnt offer pension schemes for secretaries and the like. Yes you could always have made your own arrangements outside of work, but no employer contribution and the expectation was very much this would be a supplement not a replacement.

smallglassbottle · 12/08/2026 16:12

Retirement at 89 and £100 a week pension thereafter. It's generous and everyone knows it.

T0mbell · 12/08/2026 16:13

aburrsir · 12/08/2026 15:58

I see your point, but as someone else said, most people don’t pay in enough for this to really work like that.

I don’t disagree that other benefits also need to be reviewed and adjusted, but the pension is the biggest and most costly one so I started the post there.

I would personally love to see benefits reduced for those with mental health issues out of work in exchange for better support for these individuals to get back into work and receive adequate mental health support.

I also agree that elements of UC stop people from working or wanting to work and this needs to be changed. Too many people don’t work over the 16 hour threshold because it will affect benefits - this needs to stop. Ideally people should need to evidence why they can only work so little (ie caring responsibilities etc) or why their employer won’t give them these extra hours/why they can’t find a job with more hours.

Show quote history

How are those with severe mental health problems supposed to eat?They should already be getting mental health treatment from the NHS but the system is broken thanks to years of Tory austerity. So why are they supposed to starve in order to get treatment they should already be having to stop their health getting to the stage they can’t work?Forcing the mentally ill who shouldn’t be there into work is a sure fire way to pushing them into inpatient which is a gazilloon times more expensive than being left at home to rot on benefits with no treatment.

Maddy70 · 12/08/2026 16:13

bigageap · 12/08/2026 13:36

All that will happen is people will stop work due to ill health and claim other benefits.

Yes this

T0mbell · 12/08/2026 16:14

smallglassbottle · 12/08/2026 16:12

Retirement at 89 and £100 a week pension thereafter. It's generous and everyone knows it.

No it isn’t compared to the rest of Europe. Far from it.

NullaEffugium · 12/08/2026 16:18

LoveSkaMusic · 12/08/2026 16:06

Any and all benefits are not paid for by the taxpayer. That's a lie that politicians and the public alike seem to believe.

Also, the country can't run out of money. It's has a sovereign currency, it can simply print more.

The truth is that the government can fund anything it wants to and as such running a budget deficit is not only expected, its a good thing as it means the government is actually investing into the country.

This all makes perfect sense if you think about it. The government can't tax money that hasn't been spent in the economy yet. Therefore spend comes before taxes. Further, tax money doesn't go into government coffers, it is destroyed, and replaced with new money generated when the government spends.

This means, austerity is a lie. Politicians and the Bank of England are Liars too.

The budget is not like a household budget where you have a fixed amount coming in and therefore that's the limit of what you can spend. The only limit to government spending is the need to control inflation, which should be handled via income tax. Whilst we're at it, the Bank of England manipulating interest rates to control inflation is a blunt sword, hurts everyone except the ultra rich, and they need to stop it and let the tax bands do that work instead.

And here is why we need that minimum education level to be raised.
Everythung written here is nonsense. Sorry poster.

But no the country can’t just print more money, in today’s parlance it’s called quantitative easing. In older times, it was debasing the coinage. Would you like to pay £1200 for your weekly shop? Because hyperinflation is a real possible consequence of just “print more money.” Countries can and DO run out of money and it’s not pretty. Empires have fallen. Wars. Famine. Poverty. Depopulation as refugees seek a country that is financially stable.

Not all public debt is actually investing in the country. Only public debt that is an investment (ergo there will be a predictable ROI) is good. All other public debt can ruin a country and should be embarked on with caution and a plan to get back out of debt.

The only limit to government spending is the need to control inflation, which should be handled via income tax. and Bank of England manipulating interest rates to control inflation is a blunt sword, hurts everyone except the ultra rich, and they need to stop it and let the tax bands do that work instead.

That’s really not how inflation is influenced, the government can’t control inflation, especially not via income taxes.

Indianajet · 12/08/2026 16:18

DefiantRabbit9 · 12/08/2026 14:31

Hold up you think it's unfair to start with the boomers? The generation that owns 55% of property in the country but fair to dump the burden on millennials and gen z who have been plagued with job insecurity, predatory rent, student debt and are facing a world where they're replaced by AI.

Show quote history

Here we go again - 'all boomers are rich, they live in huge houses, they are selfish etc'.
News for you - a lot of us aren't rich, live in small houses bought with hard earned money and help our children as much as we can.
I am so tired of all this ageist rubbish.

5128gap · 12/08/2026 16:18

loveawineloveacrisp · 12/08/2026 15:42

Cool. So office workers have to work til they die? You do realise that not all office jobs are a doddle and require a lot of mental dexterity?

I'm 57 and constantly tired. Very high pressure financial services job. I'm done with it.

Show quote history

Easy tiger. That's not what I said, is it?
I'm looking objectively at the proposal of working until the age of 75. I'm not making knee jerk ageist generalisations that no 75 year old could possibly do this. Fit, healthy 75 year olds who aren't doing manual work and don't have to struggle with commutes may find this possible. I'm your age and very much hope I won't have to retire in ten years. I'm fit, healthy, enjoy my work and it has no physical element. If I was a manual worker I imagine I'd view it differently.

BerryTwister · 12/08/2026 16:19

How old are you OP?

Diamondsareforever72 · 12/08/2026 16:19

arethereanyleftatall · 12/08/2026 13:41

Yanbu. It’s too high. They don’t (shouldn’t) have mortgages or children to pay for. And once you get too frail, you don’t need £200 a week, as you aren’t able to do anything with it. You’ve also had your whole life to contribute to a private pension. I know that sounds harsh, but what I am currently seeing around me is pensioners living the high life (I don’t know a single one who ‘can’t afford to eat’ even those on benefits only) but at the end other end, 30 year olds who aren’t starting families as they can’t afford it. I totally agree that something has to give.

Why shouldn’t people who have worked all their lives get to enjoy it?

NullaEffugium · 12/08/2026 16:21

They need to address why so many young people are claiming benefits and not working,

Absolutely they do, they already know why though. It’s lack of jobs. They just don’t want to admit it and the successive rises to pension age just means more people considered “working age” are scrapping over a shrinking pool of jobs.

NullaEffugium · 12/08/2026 16:22

orangehandles · 12/08/2026 14:45

Climate change is by far the most important thing any government should be dealing with right now, otherwise the generations after ours won't even get to retirement age.

Show quote history

We pay alot of government workers a lot of money, you’d think they could do both?

NullaEffugium · 12/08/2026 16:24

ownedbymydogs · 12/08/2026 15:03

Call me suspicious, but I think this is their work!

Show quote history

Possibly MP staffers doing public opinion research to inform the autumn statement.

0ppO · 12/08/2026 16:26

I agree op. Pensioners are some of the wealthiest in the country. 1 in 4 are millionaires. They don’t need fuel allowance and free prescriptions. Rattling around in their massive houses.
I realise there are poor pensioners but let’s means test it.
stop giving the rich all the taxes just because they vote and they are now a huge demographic!!

LoveSkaMusic · 12/08/2026 16:26

NullaEffugium · 12/08/2026 16:18

And here is why we need that minimum education level to be raised.
Everythung written here is nonsense. Sorry poster.

But no the country can’t just print more money, in today’s parlance it’s called quantitative easing. In older times, it was debasing the coinage. Would you like to pay £1200 for your weekly shop? Because hyperinflation is a real possible consequence of just “print more money.” Countries can and DO run out of money and it’s not pretty. Empires have fallen. Wars. Famine. Poverty. Depopulation as refugees seek a country that is financially stable.

Not all public debt is actually investing in the country. Only public debt that is an investment (ergo there will be a predictable ROI) is good. All other public debt can ruin a country and should be embarked on with caution and a plan to get back out of debt.

The only limit to government spending is the need to control inflation, which should be handled via income tax. and Bank of England manipulating interest rates to control inflation is a blunt sword, hurts everyone except the ultra rich, and they need to stop it and let the tax bands do that work instead.

That’s really not how inflation is influenced, the government can’t control inflation, especially not via income taxes.

Show quote history

Its Modern Monetary Theory. I think I got the gist of it right. I will go off and do some more research.

DontSingSusan · 12/08/2026 16:27

100% agree that the triple lock should be scrapped. The country just can't afford it.

milkhater · 12/08/2026 16:27

Indianajet · 12/08/2026 16:18

Here we go again - 'all boomers are rich, they live in huge houses, they are selfish etc'.
News for you - a lot of us aren't rich, live in small houses bought with hard earned money and help our children as much as we can.
I am so tired of all this ageist rubbish.

Show quote history

It’s not ageist to acknowledge facts. And generational trends don’t ever apply to every single individual in that generation

“the baby boomers are comfortably the richest generation in the UK. Data from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) and independent analysts show that the cohort born between 1946 and 1964 holds a dominant share of the nation's total accumulated assets, making them the wealthiest demographic group in British history”

milkhater · 12/08/2026 16:29

T0mbell · 12/08/2026 16:14

No it isn’t compared to the rest of Europe. Far from it.

Show quote history

And again people compare to Europe without understanding the models they have. It’s like apples & pears

NullaEffugium · 12/08/2026 16:31

LauraNorda · 12/08/2026 15:53

Said it before but this is what I would do with pensions.

Starting April 2027, every newborn is given a years tax-free allowance ie £12570 and is placed inside a SIPP 100% in equities. The trade-off is that there will be no state pension for that person. The tax-free allowance will rise year on year by inflation.

You would be able to change providers if you so wish but obviously, the money would not be available until state retirement age ie 67. I would keep that set forever. When the time comes, you would only be able to buy an annuity.

If you never put a single penny into that pension, 5% growth (low for the stock market) over 67 years will net you just under £354,000. Buying an annuity with that would give a lump sum of £87,500 and annual payment for life of £19,600.

10% growth over 67 years (about average) will net you just under £9,800,000. Buying an annuity with that would give a lump sum of £2,450,000 and annual payment for life of £549,000.

If you add just £50 a month for those 67 years, the figures are phenomenal. You would have a pot of £14,600,000. An annuity with that would give a lump sum of £3,650,000 and an annual for life payment of £818,000.

You could fund a decent amount of care out of that if you needed to, so costs would reduce there too.

I would add a proviso that you have to pay back whatever the seed money is the year you retire out of your tax-free lump sum.

Eventually, State pension costs would be self-funding and cost the country nothing.

I'm sure there are flaws in my plan but it seems simple enough to me.

The major flaw is this is a lunatic amount of money to come up with.

Indianajet · 12/08/2026 16:31

0ppO · 12/08/2026 16:26

I agree op. Pensioners are some of the wealthiest in the country. 1 in 4 are millionaires. They don’t need fuel allowance and free prescriptions. Rattling around in their massive houses.
I realise there are poor pensioners but let’s means test it.
stop giving the rich all the taxes just because they vote and they are now a huge demographic!!

1 in 4 are millionaires? Really?
I suppose people living in the South may have properties worth a lot, but there are very few millionaires (none) in my social circle!

milkhater · 12/08/2026 16:32

T0mbell · 12/08/2026 16:07

So fed up with this. I’m in my late 50s and work in education. No way can I keep going until I’m 75.

We all need state decent pensions, it comes sooner than you think and UK state pensions are already at the bottom of state pensions in Europe.

I’d rather means test child benefit harder first. Far too many families fritter money on expensive endless tech kids don’t need , designer clothes, holidays abroad, eating out, coffee etc. Don’t really want my taxes paying to be frittered like that
and definitely don’t want money taken from pensions to continue to fund it.

Child benefit was universal but it no longer is!

NullaEffugium · 12/08/2026 16:32

DontSingSusan · 12/08/2026 16:27

100% agree that the triple lock should be scrapped. The country just can't afford it.

Nope. You’d be scrapping it just as the generation after the baby boomers starts to retire and they are no where near as well off. Once again the baby boomers get the best of the best and the ladder gets pulled up for all of us who come after.

milkhater · 12/08/2026 16:33

@Indianajet

It’s due to housing & pension as the schemes that were available then were far more generous.

T0mbell · 12/08/2026 16:35

milkhater · 12/08/2026 16:29

And again people compare to Europe without understanding the models they have. It’s like apples & pears

Show quote history

Regardless, as a country we shouldn’t be aiming to provide an even smaller state pension when we’re already near the bottom with Mexico ranking marginally above.