To be glad triple lock going and hope they means test it too

[Randomamsi]

I have a multi millionaire senior relative who receives £1,400 from the state pension each month, in addition to 6k private pension.

He's not means tested and he's received that for 30 years. Yes, he paid into the system but he does not need it!!! He also had free uni, dirt cheap first house back in the 60s and retired aged 59.

Meanwhile the younger generation:

• thousands in student loan debt
• asset poor as can't get on the housing ladder
• means tested for child benefit, tax free childcare etc
• working until late 60s/ 70s

Why do pensioners have it easy while younger ones pay the price?

For vulnerable pensioners at risk of poverty, there should obviously be provision to help them, I'm not suggesting we let people starve. But multimillionaire pensioners or very asset rich pensioners do NOT need the state pension. It's about time things changed.

This I checked mine only yesterday and when I am able to draw it at 2033 it will be worth £1049 hardly a fortune!

It really isn’t. People have to pay into a pot through their working life to fund old age when they are unable to work. There is no other way for people to fund old age. Look at it as paying into a savings account during your working life, and then when you can no longer work, you start to draw on it to survive. On the other hand, some don’t make it out of their teens before a life long dependency on benefits without having paid a penny into the pot. You can’t draw a state pension if you haven’t paid into it. But welfare claimants can draw out without paying into it.

@viqueswhat bit are you confused by? I never said everyone has a private pension, I was replying to a poster saying that said they didn’t exist!!!! Are you agreeing they didn’t exist or what? 70% managed to have one despite them not existing!

Fundamentally it’s not sustainable as it is. Most people actually pay in less than they take out so you must realise this has to be topped up from somewhere.

It is legally defined as a benefit.
I still don't agree it should be means tested.

Come now, don’t bring actual statistics and facts into this. “Tax the Rich” sounds so much better for so many……

@Livelovebehappy you don’t understand how it works.
It’s not a savings account. The NI you pay today pays for today’s pensioners & the changing demographics means that younger people are paying a lot more into the system vs current pensioners who are taking out more. It’s a demographics problem.

My nan also gets the old higher rate.

Your contributions were not "misspent". They funded the pensions of those older than you, as intended. Now the ratios have changed, and so too must expectations.

Not confused.

Just pointing out for the arithmetically challenged, quite a few of whom are on this thread, that if 70% of pensioners have a private pension it means that 30% of pensioners don’t.

I think people’s bitterness on here are due to them realising that governments are going to keep raising the retirement age. Possibly 20 years from now people are going to be expected to retire at 75. So fewer people potentially are going to benefit from it.

This relative is probably an in-law, they generally are on here

Allowing for yearly rises, the SP in 2033 will be around £14-15k, so if we have high inflation for a few years, it will be worth less than now in real terms.

I’ve got index linked Gilts in my SIPP to hopefully counteract some of that.

Why should those who’ve worked 40-50 years plus be means tested? Those who are rich shouldn’t be claiming anyway but even if they do, they DID pay into the pot for all those years. What IS deeply unfair is people not working a day in their lives yet getting looked after in their old age.

No party is going to cancel it, they were waiting to see who would blink first. They will blame Labour for getting rid of the triple lock but they won’t bring it back.

And you can get a state pension without paying NI, you can get credits if not working and claiming child benefit, carers allowance., if you get JSA etc

Let's turn this on it's head shall we? Remove the state pension from people who have worked bloody hard to earn their wealth AND no doubt paid shed loads of tax to boot? What incentive is there to then work hard? You get screwed for tax then get screwed for the state pension then get screwed on inheritance tax on death. Meanwhile there's a whole swathe of the population who have never worked but claimed full benefits, get to go on holidays and get their state pension and elderly care paid for by the state but no one is yelling about that. You are directing your ire at the wrong place. Fix the benefits culture and then you can sort out whether pension should be means tested. I will also just say this - you can top up your national insurance contributions to ensure you get your full state pension. If the government continue to accept voluntary contributions on that basis, it cannot be made means tested otherwise the premise on which additional contributions were collected is in effect fraudulent - would the person have made the contribution had they known they would not get their pension? No in all likelihood. And no I'm not a millionaire before it's get said - no where even close!

I obviously know it’s not a savings account, but am saying that it’s a different way of looking at it. We all pay into the pot during our working life. It’s compulsory. Then we draw on it once we retire.

@dementedmummy but we do that to workers with child benefit, free hours, the cliff edges etc

Agreed in this case but let’s leave it in place for those that are paying huge amounts every month for care (right down til their last 20odd thousand pounds ) at the moment. If that gets sorted out then fine.

@Livelovebehappy And I am saying regardless of how you look at it, it’s still a benefit. The vast majority pay nowhere near enough vs what they take out.

It’s only a right/entitlement in the sense that it’s currently the rule. Like it’s my right not to pay a mansion tax. Until the rules change.

I think govt has some moral obligation to have a state pension, given what people reasonably expect. But they don’t have an obligation never to change pension policy.

I wish we had a proper funded state pension scheme, but we don’t. The NI contribution is really just marketing. It’s just tax that goes into the current spending pot.

Agree, everybody knows it’s not sustainable

Why do you have access to his bank statements? And if he's given permission why would you plaster it on SM?

Over a normal retirement, many high earners (which I am guessing your Uncle was) recover far less than their cumulative lifetime high-rate contributions equate to.

Conversely, those who reach only the minimum National Insurance contributions take out significantly more in state pension than they put in. People like your Uncle are subsidising people who need help…… do you really want to discourage them from doing so?

Do you want to change the system: allow someone like your Uncle to stop paying NI and put their money (which would have gone to NI) solely in their private pension or savings…… those who need the money may be worse off as there will be less in the pot for them?……. unless it is taxed in another way…… but the tax burden is already crazy for those who generate wealth……

If we keep biting the hand that feeds the welfare state the long term outlook for our welfare state may be considerably worse than if we enable and encourage wealth generation to fund it!