Change to pensions benefitting SAHMs and married couples...

[SpawnChorus]

Is this some sort of lame attempt to appease us for the loss of Child Benefit?

I don't believe for one second that I will actually recieve any state pension when I reach retirement age.

Appletrees, my point is that yes, you have contributed to a pension but if you choose to take some time out (for whatever reason) you will get less back. What about the women who have chosen not to have children but cover for those who do during illness etc at work. Shouldnt they get more back for contributing without a break....

Benefits are different IMHO. They are completely overwhelming the country now and it is time for a change. Why should a family who arent working insist on living in Chelsea or demand a bigger house because they have chosen to have child after child with no hope of supporting them without benefits.

agree with last 2 posts - if you've paid in more via SERPS you should get more back. No problem with the 140 increase as long as it doesn't affect the SERPs element.

SAHMs knew the score when they chose to do this. those of us who've worked have paid extra contributions on the understanding we will get more back and we have usually paid someone else to do our childminding - so we have still been responsible for childcare anyway

Universal payments are simple and easy to adminster and I hope we're going the way of them in a number of areas bit by bit. Although they do encourage dependence on the state and universalise claimant mentalities.

We should abolish NI for a start and merge it with tax and we could put tax rates up a bit at the same time if we had to afford it. It's never worked as people thought - never been money set aside. It's just current workers paying for older workers. You never had your own protected fund.

Mumsnet is always awful to pensioners and think they live the life of Riley. As someone said above many of them have had dreadful times, rationing, no proper homes, no central hearing, scrimped all their lives and now are on very low sums and young families who think life is hard today have absolutely no idea how lucky they are and how much they have compared to what many penioners had at their age and stage.

I am getting abit angry at always reading the rich should pay for this and don't deserve anything back. Just because people have money doesn't mean they are not entitled to state pension. I know quite a few people who have never claimed the child benefit and give into a lot of charities. I think the most vulnerable should be looked after. As for the rest of us we have to just get on with it because these cuts are going to happen.

xenia - my ILs get pension top-ups because their basic income was so low. and they are richer than they ever were when he worked. they regularly give money away because they have too much and it affects their benefits. they have a holiday abroad, one in the uk, redecorate regularly and run a car. 2 of the pensioners in my close have 2 homes. and many of them were only poor in their working lives because only the man worked - we can't afford that luxury now.

i don't agree with the sentiment of always putting tax up a bit because people can afford it. we work very hard and have a lot of financial outlays and it doesn't seem unreasonable to be able to splash out on a few luxuries rather than always being expected to fork out an ever incresing amount of tax.