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.

They don't pay extra, they get tax credits and housing benefit, free dental etc etc

Is it hell. Do you think folk on UC on 434 quid a month are living the high life. All "shirkers".

It does sound much but for someone on the minimum wage works for 40 years, that’s £150 a month! Whilst the principle seems good in practice it’s not. Then there’s the fact the £72k won’t go very far when paying for a care home or live in carers!

Where do we put Ethel when her house is sold? £300k is nothing if you live in London, and not much in towns around the London area. Ethel might get herself a grotty flat in Gravesend or the Medway towns for about £200k. Going from her freehold house to the joys of leasehold and leasehold management... Ethel needs a home, she has a perfectly reasonable house, but we're going to make her sell it, live on the proceeds until they run out... or maybe she needs a nice new council house? Ethel and her late husband paid for that house over many hard working years, thinking that at least they would have a roof over their heads in old age.
Are we going to shove her in one of Andy's lovely care homes? Ethel might only be say 68, active and helping her family with childcare on a daily basis.

Seriously, where do we put the 'Ethel's' after we've force them to sell their homes to live on the proceeds because they have no state pension?

No such thing as working tax credits.

Totally agree that buying years need to be looked at. It’s a cheap way of non-residents buying an income that’s way more than they’ve paid in tax.

There is means testing of the state pension already in that if you have other sources of income the state pension will take up pretty much all of your personal allowance and that additional income is therefore taxed in full.

I agree that NICs needs to be rolled into income tax.

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.

So no pension at all for anyone? Are you going to bring back work houses?

On the other hand, if you are going to means test pensions, how are you going to incentivise saving?

Why would a 20 year old struggling to pay their rent pay money into a pension if it makes no difference in the end?

I suppose you could make pension contributions mandatory, but how are you going to sell that to the electorate if they aren't necessarily going to see any benefit?

Rich relatives aside, there are millions of people who've worked for 50 or 60 years or longer and have paid into the state system and are now entitled to receive their pension. People who have no chance of ever earning further money or a living any other way due to their age.

The government should be focusing on multimillionaires who tax dodge legally or otherwise, to make up any deficit in government spending

Spanish social security contributions are 37% of gross salary, but mostly paid by employer.

The UK seems to be about 20%.

Correct me if I’m wrong.

Well, not exactly. I didn't choose for XH to leave, which has had a significant impact on my financial situation. I'm working my way out of it, but it's not easy. I've never claimed any other benefit, but CB has really helped me.

Nobody can predict the future and people find themselves in situations they didn't expect to be in. On paper, £3k/month sounds pretty good. In reality, after mortgage, bills, etc (all of which used to be split across two incomes), it doesn't go far (especially in London) and the Child Benefit is a huge help to me.

The comment about people on £3k+ implied that, at that income, people are basically rolling in it. And I don't think that's the case. I budget hard and live pretty frugally to live within my income.

Usually because they didn't put enough into private pensions from their 20s to retirement ... lack of forward planning.

Surely your relative paid a lot into that pension? It's not a benefit. Let's just reward people who cannot be bothered to work in this country.

Everyone who is not a net contributor (ie earning over around £45k per year) should very much hope that borders won't break down.

A tax-payer funder, non-contributory welfare state depends on the group being of limited size, and there being a sense of common identity and cohesion within it. So that people are willing to contribute more than they get back, to help those who have less.

You can either have the welfare state or open borders. Not both.

He's taxed on his income - state and private pension combined - over the personal tax allowance.

I started getting my state pension 2 years ago - it's less than £900 per month. I get a private pension of about £2000 per month. I pay tax on the combined amount over the tax threshold. I am not entitled to any pension credits.

Please stop using ONE example (and if he's been on state pension for years, he us not getting £1400 per month) as your benchmark for all pensioners.

Nonsense
Whoever seriously considers this will be voted out immediately by the grey vote
AB knows this so is kicking the can down the road
How is reducing pensioners to further poverty a Labour policy?

Honest my arse!

This is nothing to do with the triple lock, and about whether people of pensionable age with significant assets /income should receive a state benefit (the state pension) . If you agree with this principle, at what point (assets or earnings) should it be withdrawn. How many extra people would be need to pay to track this, and would this include people whose only income is the state pension but who are sitting in an ex council flat in London, now worth £750k - £1m+, (and not because they paid that but because of inflation)

It’s my entire experience of most older people. They act like younger people owe them something and it’s tiresome. But it’s alright for them because they’re sitting on stacks of cash and a house they bought for £60k in the 90s.

I don't care, it's your problem in the UK. But I think it's incredible how your system keeps funding people with enough assets to have a comfortable life without the need for governments forking out billions to them on estate pensions when your NHS in on its knees and the stardards of living are going down for the majority of people.

Don't agree with that.

I think it's more honourable to propose what you will do after the next election, IF the country votes for you. IF people vote for Labour/Burnham in the next GE, then they know exactly what they are voting for.

I’m part of the grey vote. I’m definitely voting for it. We’re not all selfish bastards regardless of what @AllIwantForChrismasIsAKitchenAidStandMixer might think.

Yes I did. So no need for you to repeat what other posters have said along with a nasty remark.

If he was receiving state pension before 2016 he may very well be getting £1400 or more a month.

The difference is that in Australia, your pension savings go into your super.

Our state pension is like your super. Just state-managed, and a bit more socialist, because it's a flat rate out no matter how much you put in.

How would you feel if people were suggesting that your super should be means-tested?

The Australian state-funded pension is more like our 'Pension Credits' - ie non-contributory and means-tested.

Those pensioners also had families.

Not if he inherited the money.