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.

Pensioners who have worked and paid taxes their whole life should be entitled to the triple lock guarantee on there pension.

If we are going to call pension a benefit or a contributory benefit, for the avoidance of doubt we need to find a new name for it and called it 'earned benefit or earned entitlement' to afford respect to those who worked and we need to start calling the other benefits (apart from invalidity benefits) unearned benefit or unearned entitlement.

It is obscene to compare

But the point is, it is not a pot. It is social handcuffs both from the point of view of the worker and indeed the government. The state pension system is no longer sustainable and needs to be fundamentally changed.

Moving the age out is a form of means testing is it not. Lots of people my age will have paid in 50 yrs if we work until 68

But I don't work (really bloody hard) to get benefits back. I work for security now and in the future. I don't begrudge paying tax, I don't see it as "getting screwed" I'm privileged to pay the amount of tax I pay, and I want to pay in for a better society all round.

Even though it’s unaffordable & the fact the vast majority haven’t paid anywhere near enough in?

Im in my seventies and worked till 70..pension is 900 ish per 4 weeks. Dry small ptivate pension. If you are wealthy and old, youll pay lots of inheritance tax,

Its all smoke and mirrors nonsense, it wont happen under this Labour govt anyway
It will be electoral suicide and if Labour are out a new govt wont touch it

So essentially everyone can stand down

I hope the OPs millionaire relative leaves it all to a cat/dog/donkey sanctuary

I do think the triple lock should go

@ClaudettedeBeauvoir yes, I don’t understand this argument that is only ever applied to pensions for some reason. I work despite some people not, I pay a mortgage despite some having social housing, I stopped at 2 dc despite other families getting benefits, etc

I doubt the threshold will be a pension pot of couple of million, over time.

They (whether Labour or Conservative or whoever) will probably decide what is a living wage, e.g. around £30k, and if your private pension gives you an income of £30k pa, you won’t qualify for a state pension.

At least IHT tax is a tax you pay when you are dead.

He'll be paying tax on whatever he gets on top.

They will get them. They will increase each year. Inflation proofed. Nobody wants to abolish them , except Farage. Perhaps that's why he's slipping in the polls. Who knows.

But realistically wealthy people get to retain a disproportionate amount of their earnings compared to people on lower pay because of tax. Why should they have their pension removed? And why should some people never do a day's work (out over laziness I'm talking about, not disability), never contribute to the running of society but still get full credit and claim a full pension? That doesn't work either but more people seem to be concerned with wealthy people claiming a pension than getting people off benefits and into work.

Labour says this will happen in 2030 when they might not be in Government.

Personally I am in a position where I have a private pension pot that will support me in my retirement. I’ve paid tens of thousands in NI contributions in the 20 years I have worked so far. Would I forgo this contribution if it means overhaul of the unsustainable pension system so my kids are not lumbered with it? Yes I definitely would.

The demographic changes are a huge issue that has been kicked down the road. We already have more over 65s than under 15s.

If he's receiving £6,000 a month private pension there is no way he would receive £1400 from the Government in state pension The old style pension is less than the new and even with pension credit it wouldn't be as much as that.

A person is only entitled to pension credit top up if their weekly income is less than the Government says a person can live on a week. He would be over that threshold.

What about the ones that have paid nothing or very little in comparison to what they're likely to take out (the majority)? What should they be guaranteed?

According to the Guardian:

From 2030, under what Labour is calling an “adjusted triple lock”, the pension will still rise either in line with prices, or 2.5% each year, whichever is higher – but it won’t rise in line with earnings unless its value has fallen behind. In that case, it will be adjusted so that it keeps pace.

It's not entirely obvious to me what the bit in bold actually means, it sounds a bit like wage growth will still be taken into account.....

How does he receive £100 more a week than everyone else?

Well he’ll have paid into his private pension through salary sacrifice his entire life. Similar re. State pension.

it’s fair he gets his share given he held up his end of the deal.

don’t equate needs with fairness. He may not need it, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t fair for him to get it.

i really hate means testing in principle. Should be one rule for all inc pension, child benefit, child care.

Not forgetting that those of use of working age will be paying a higher tax rate than your relative, because NI disappears at retirement age. They should roll it into income tax to remove this loophole.