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.

In Spain, if you receive your state pension you can not work. If they did this in the UK there would be plenty if jobs and the government eoimdnt have to pay £750 million to Boots etc. To give NEETs jobs.

I think you’re missing the point that the state pension isn’t a benefit it’s money people have paid into throughout their working lives on the assumption that it gets paid out at retirement. To means test it would be the equivalent of saving money yourself in a savings account for years, then the government say you can’t have it.

You think that you have to have fought in a war to deserve a pension that you've actually contributed to?

And the narrative of "poor pensioners" isn't true do you think?

I think this may be one of the thickest posts I've read on here in a while.

Rubbish, the world is overpopulated and borders already breaking down.

I bet you didn't get 1 free childcare hours either!

Maybe 5 year increments.
The thing to do though is make it be known (at the beginning of a new term) that the state pension will be scrapped, so people in their twenties and thirties know they won’t be getting anything.
Means testing it now would immediately start saving money, tapered over the next 30 years until it’s gone.
Not sure we have thirty years of this affluence left though with the current system.

There is about £4 trillion of mortgage free residential property in the UK.
It cannot be that the state is paying benefits to Ethel while she has £300k of equity tied up in housing.

Uh, the state pension is absolutely a benefit. It's the biggest cost of the UK's welfare bill.

The amount you receive is not dependent on the amount you pay in. Of course it's a benefit and should be means tested

People make mistakes.

It's not.

The amount you receive in no way correlates to the amount you pay in. Paying in is a tax, it's not your own pension pot.

The £6k a month that this person receives already uses up all of their personal income tax allowance, so the marginal tax rate on his approx. £1,000 a month state pension is 40%. In effect the progressive income tax system acts as a form of means test - pensioners with a private pension and other income of over £50,000 pay 40% tax on their state pension; if they have other income that takes this to over £125k, they pay 45%

No. The analogy does not work.
Tax and NI goes into a pot to be spent by the government the way it sees fit/mandated. The community chest.

A savings account is your personal account.

Plenty of people get child benefit.

You sound a nasty jealous person! Come back when you’ve retired and have to live on the state pension! Your relative has probably paid far more in tax and NI than you ever will! Not every pensioner is rich but then you’re probation stupid to realise this!

Thanks PigletJohn, really interesting. I’ll have a look at the link.

At this time would you overpay on mortgage or put money into a private pension?

I'm technically Baby Boomer and not due my pension for 5 years.

Why do you think people who get their state pension are still working? Simply most cannot afford to retire! In Spain mainly jobs are in hospitality and the pension is far higher than the UK!

I have been a state pensioner for around one year, but I am still working (& a higher rate tax payer). I don’t have a problem with the triple lock going, but I disagree with means testing the state pension. I say that even though I’m as sure as I can be that bringing in means testing would not affect anyone already receiving it or anyone in their 50s or 60s. It would be the younger generations who would lose out.

I suspect the law of unintended consequences would apply if means testing were brought in. So, instead of people throwing money into their private pensions, as they tend to do when they can see retirement appearing over the horizon, some will spend, spend, in order to keep below the threshold. Obviously, not the people who want to maintain a good standard of living after retirement, but those on the borders of the threshold.

i do think there are other ways of making things fairer. I knew I wouldn’t have to pay NI contributions on any pension received, either state or private, but I hadn’t realised that my salary would not be subject to NI contributions once I hit state retirement age. Getting rid of NI and increasing income tax rates would be fair, in my view.

i also think we need to be looking at whether people who have lived abroad for large parts of their working lives should be able to buy extra years so cheaply, if at all. People who work here in the UK contribute in all sorts of ways other than by paying taxes. That should be reflected in entitlement to pensions.

Maybe there's reasons why people on state pensions continue to work. My state pension will be 241 pounds a week on retirement.

Over populated yes...but in developed countries the birth rate is low. We have aging populations...someone needs to support these people. The mythical pension pots that people have contributed to don't exist. Pensions are paid out of the overall taxes which the government collect. We need a working population

Be careful what you wish for OP. You will benefit from the SP one day, either as your entire income or as a very welcome top up to what you managed to save yourself.

The triple lock, fine. It's a big fuss about not a lot IMO, tag the SP increase to price inflation and that's fine too.

But to means test the SP is madness and benefits only low contributors and people who have not saved for the future. Eventually it would only be paid to those who haven't paid in (through ill health or laziness), those who avoided tax (lived abroad, worked cash in hand) or those who spent or hid all their earnings.

We need to motivate the population to work hard and save, you don't do that by rewarding the opposite.

I'm a bit shocked reading this thread. I thought the state pension in the UK was means tested like in Australia and even Spain where I was born.

In Australia we have an age state pension of roughly $2,400 a month but is heavily income and means tested. Any income surpassing this amount will reduce or terminate the pension in a proportional porcentage. Pensions from overseas are also counted as income. Anyone on a $A 6000 a month will not get a state pension in Australia.

Assets are also means tested. The family home is not part of the assets but anything else, is. If you have a money in the bank, a second home, shares, or investments over $330,000, forget getting the age pension.

I have a widowed friend. She's 78 and her pension was denied because she had a second home which could be sold or rented. She sold it. The money is giving her an 80,000 yearly income she doesn't spend.

No country can sustain paying billions of pounds (or dollars) in state pensions to people with enough wealth to do without. Not when health and housing are becoming unafordable for the majority of working people, and daily living costs are seriously affecting that majority.

As I said, I'm shocked the UK state pension is not means, and income tested.

We have plenty of people who need a job. Young people here already who should be working.

This is spot on!

I think it is insane when generations pit themselves against each other. We are all just a product of our age and environment. We have no control over when we were born, so the censure is illogical.

I am Gen X, have worked fulltime all my life and expect to carry on till pension age. I was lucky enough to have free tuition fees and I’m very grateful about that. If I was a boomer, then I would have had the advantage of low house prices and other perks. Would that automatically mean I would be called selfish now? Any of us would have done what boomers had done at the time of course. We are no better or worse as people than them.

I am pleased that my millennial cousins have had some help with nursery and childcare costs as they were crippling for me. I struggle to think of many advantages for Gen Z and worry about my children’s future all the time. I am not going to begrudge them takeaway coffees; the world has changed a lot since I was 20.

None of us should be defined by our age. It is crazy to demean boomers simply because of the age they are. They are a diverse group like anyone else, some will be selfish and some will be altruistic and most will be in between.

And as all of us will age, it is worth keeping the pension at a reasonably healthy level. It is sometime off for me still, but as a pensioner, your costs may be less than a single mum, but also the opportunity for increasing your income is extremely limited for many, esp if there are health issues. You are potentially completely dependent on the state and that is quite a scary place to be.

I celebrate a ‘win’ for any age group and view ‘cuts’ with some trepidation. People being poor increases costs on social care, the NHS, criminal justice services etc, so we need to be careful.

Sure you'll get over it.