Would you vote for Labour/Getting rid of Triple Lock at the next general election?

[mybiggreenfrog]

Yes (YABU)
No (YANBU)

...just to reduce your hours and not take any promotions and have a better work life balance.

Actually, that doesn't sound bad. And it particularly benefits women who typically have to take more time off their careers for motherhood and caring duties. It's much fairer.

You'll find that it was the Tories and Reform who were demanding that we join in with Trump's stupid war this time around.

This … with bells on

No but that isn't what they are proposing, wait and see but cuts to the state pension is a no no, it's low enough already, anyone here happy to live on £12k a year and stuck at that equivalent?

Saw someone here today say they can't live on £45k

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-09-30/uk-economy-grew-more-than-expected-in-second-quarter
UK Growth Revised Higher in First Half, Exceeding Rest of G7

As more people live longer, this issue will affect more and more 40/50/60 year olds, who are much younger now.
So the argument will move from a theoretical 'I'm fine with my mum's house being sold to fund her care' to a real 'why should I lose out'?
People are selfish and want what benefits them. The more switched-on can see this, but there is a large proportion on this thread who seem to think they are their parents are eternal so it's not their problem and have plenty to say to others who can see the writing on the wall.

Pensioner's outgoings are generally a lot lower than a family's though.

With the NHS on its knees, it is hard to see that Labour will manage to create some magical new social care system even if they do stop the triple lock as they refuse to face the fact that the welfare bill is using up any savings from anywhere else already. They seem deluded to me.
I am in my 50s and am relying on getting my state pension alongside my modest work pension. There needs to be an incentive to work and save and Labour risk undermining this if rumours about means testing pensions start. I’ve paid NI for about 40 years now - so really expect to get my turn to claim my pension regardless as I feel I am owed it.
when I started work, I expected to retire at 60 - but now I have to wait until 67 - so if means testing comes in before that, they’d better be ready for my reaction (and that of many others!)

Ridiculous comment.
Have you forgotten the mess the Tories got us in during the last 14 yrs bar 2.
Selective memory.
Yes I agree to end the triple lock and I don't get my pension for another 3 years.
Social care needs fixing this will be the start of it but we will all ultimately benefit from it.

what is different?

Your link says 13.5% of 16-24yo are NEETs, it's 16% for 18-24yo group, but it is still 11 years high.

I'll give it to Labour that they say they want to fix it, but surely the best way to do it is to create conditions for economic growth so to raise hiring, not increase 16-18yo NMW and give them day 1 protection

People should know why AB has said he wants to remove the Triple Lock ... but will care for the elderly be free at source? In my view, there will not be enough savings for this to be so.

GDP expanded 0.5 per cent in the three months to June, the Office for National Statistics said on Wednesday, up from its initial estimate of 0.4 per cent and compared with a 0.6 per cent pace in the first quarter.

This on the top of 3% inflation

But there would be no reason at all to pay voluntary NI contributions, or pay to fill any gaps. The government would lose this income.

It doesn't quite fit the narrative?

I agree that pensioners who get an income from any form of employment should pay NI.

I don't have a Facebook account.

It sounds bad to those of us who need the money.

That’s an awful idea that penalises people for making provision for their retirement. There should be a basic amount that everybody gets. If you want a fancier retirement then you have to put more in to a private pension.

Most immigrants do not get any of those thinfs except access to the NHS but they pay tax and NI towards that like the rest of us.

I don't know who I will vote for next GE. Getting rid of the triple lock won't sway me either way. I'm 64 and just laugh now - first the retirement age got later and later - from 60 to 65, then 66 and now 67. And when I finally make it to 67 the triple lock will be gone too.

And no, I'm not one of those wealthy boomers who blah, blah and blah; just one of those people who will have to carry on in her NMW job (whilst it lasts), still paying a mortgage who will retire on full state pension with a little bit of SERPS to boost it.

The life of Riley it is not.

Not really. And especially not for middle income earners. If I put less into my pension, even with the tax savings I have less take home than if I put nothing in my pension. If you are super wealthy it’s still worth it. Not for the rest of us.

If I end up with the same pension whether I save save for a pension or not, there is very little point in putting money on a private pension.

Can you explain your statement?

I wish people understood what they are talking about.

Pension funds are the largest investors in FTSE businesses. If you disinsetivise people to save into private pensions (which you certainly do by making state pension means tested) you switch off investments from businesses. Wonder how many will go bust? or will have to be sold to private equity and die a slow death? the consequences of such move will be the worst nightmare

Barracks sound like much better value for money than hotels.

Here you go @DdraigGoch