Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Politics] UK state pension age will soon need to rise to 71, say experts
- Thread starter Mustafa II
- Start date
Shropshire Seagull
Well-known member
There's a double jeopardy arising here.
As the age of retirement goes up, the younger generation will moan because they'll have to work longer.
The older generation will also have to work longer thus blocking career progression for the younger generation, who will moan.
But the younger generation will (eventually) inherit the wealth and will moan that inheritance tax is too high and unfair.
As the age of retirement goes up, the younger generation will moan because they'll have to work longer.
The older generation will also have to work longer thus blocking career progression for the younger generation, who will moan.
But the younger generation will (eventually) inherit the wealth and will moan that inheritance tax is too high and unfair.
You again. Bore off!
UK state pension age will soon need to rise to 71, say experts
Research on life expectancy and birth rates shows that ill health makes status quo unsustainablewww.theguardian.com
Yet another reminder of how good the boomers have it, and how the younger generations will receive blow after blow.
Silverhatch
Well-known member
Indeed - but the ratio of (British) executive pay to general worker pay was relatively tiny at 1 to 20. Thatcher smashed that when dismantling British manufacturing/production and promoting/replacing it with a service economy.
Yes, I was going to add that perhaps it should be flexible depending on a number of factors - and not everybody with a desk job is a picture of health at 66.
The fact remains though that it needs to reflect reality and certainly should be debated. Just because it was set to a certain figure X years ago (or even certain criteria) doesn't mean it should always be that.
A mex eyecan
Well-known member
- Nov 3, 2011
- 3,854
oh not again …….UK state pension age will soon need to rise to 71, say experts
Research on life expectancy and birth rates shows that ill health makes status quo unsustainable
Yet another reminder of how good the boomers have it, and how the younger generations will receive blow after blow.
I think that if those born after 1970 are having their pension ages pushed back again we also need to look at those already receiving the state pension and share the burden. If they are to push ahead with this the state pension should also become means tested for those born before 1970. I am aware of people retired now earning over £50k a year and getting a state pension, and remember you pay no NI as it's not earned income.
Nobby Cybergoat
Well-known member
- Jul 19, 2021
- 8,622
We are very very lucky that young people from around the world want to come and set up their lives here. Without that the pension system would increasingly have fewer working age people to support the oldies in their dotage.
A mex eyecan
Well-known member
- Nov 3, 2011
- 3,854
but all of them will eventually become pensionable age who will need even more youngsters to pay for it. And so it turns.
BrightonCottager
Well-known member
Life expectancy has plateaued and for women is beginning to reduce (as a result of ill health) but it appears that the study assumes this to be temporary.
Incidentally, you can check your average life expectancy here.
The main issue in this study is increasing poor health which is related to poverty and needs to be tackled by another Government. Redistributive wealth taxes and an increase in the working population through increased immigration (which it appears the Government is doing) could help to keep the pension age down in the shorter term.
Incidentally, you can check your average life expectancy here.
The main issue in this study is increasing poor health which is related to poverty and needs to be tackled by another Government. Redistributive wealth taxes and an increase in the working population through increased immigration (which it appears the Government is doing) could help to keep the pension age down in the shorter term.
beorhthelm
A. Virgo, Football Genius
- Jul 21, 2003
- 36,013
weird putting primary school teacher alongside a scaffolder, instead of a desk job which it's closer to. most teachers seem to take early retirement, or semi-retirement as supply anyway. and i dont think ive ever seen a middle aged let alone near pension scaffoleder.
the pension age is currently gone up to 67 for those born after 1970, 68 for those born after 1978. there's going to be no change here. maybe those born after 1990 might lose another year. people live longer, and retire earlier, not that the article makes much of this. we're getting to point of more people retired than working.
Nobby Cybergoat
Well-known member
- Jul 19, 2021
- 8,622
You're right of course. But what needs to be avoided is a Japan type situation where there's not enough working age to support the elderly.
Pension ages will have to rise. Early 70s feels about right. The idea that people are used to that you can have on average a 20 year retirement isn't sustainable. To manage that transition we need young people now. Which thankfully we're getting.
East Staffs Gull
Well-known member
The flip side is that they themselves are accruing state pensions that future generations will be required to fund.
- Oct 20, 2022
- 6,905
Your post is contradictory so it makes it difficult to respond to but I think unlikely that there would be ’no State pension at all‘ - however, we could be moving towards a system where State Pensions are means-tested, which more or less means the same thing as your next sentence.
Personally, I don’t have a problem with means-tested benefits as a rule (that ensures State help goes to those most in need barring fraud of course) but a compulsory system of private pension scheme contribution would need to be in place to ensure those on above a certain income level were actually contributing to their pension pot.
No government could remove the safety net of State Pensions for those on low incomes or have no private pension, people would be destitute.
Keep trying - you’ll get through eventually. However, you definitely need to get a pension forecast before HMRC will provide you with a voluntary contribution code if you haven’t already - it will be the first thing they ask you for.
Contact the Future Pension Centre
Future Pension Centre contact details - for pension forecasts, statements, advice and enquiries.
Once you have a recent forecast, try again - It took me over an hour the first time to get through a few years ago - I was then given an 18 digit code which was needed to make any Class 3 contributions and which I now use for follow up contributions. I paid a lump sum to cover gaps in my NI contributions and now pay annually a contribution using online banking until I retire which will give me a full pension - my contributions increased my State pension to an extra £50+ quid a week so it was worth it for me to cover the historical gaps and make annual class 3 contributions from now on.
Pay voluntary Class 3 National Insurance
How to pay your voluntary Class 3 National Insurance contributions - online, Direct Debit, bank transfer, cheque.
Nobby Cybergoat
Well-known member
- Jul 19, 2021
- 8,622
To me the solution to this has got to be phased transitions into retirement.
The set up should be that when someone reaches 65, their employer can legally reduce their hours to say 16 hours per week. At 70 to 72 then normal retirement as we know it kicks in and state pension starts.
I don't see how to the working full time to full retirement at 65 helps anyone
The set up should be that when someone reaches 65, their employer can legally reduce their hours to say 16 hours per week. At 70 to 72 then normal retirement as we know it kicks in and state pension starts.
I don't see how to the working full time to full retirement at 65 helps anyone
East Staffs Gull
Well-known member
Isn’t it 67 for those born after April 1960?
- Nov 11, 2009
- 12,267
Cheers for the leftist rant.
The fact is we are paying more in taxes right now than ever.
Corporation tax is also a lot higher.
This problem, which affects me too, is a lot more complex than simplistic tropes.
Nobby Cybergoat
Well-known member
- Jul 19, 2021
- 8,622
I think the fella making the leftist rant had a point.
Yes we're paying more in taxes, but we need to because a) Health and social security costs are going up much faster than inflation b) Inequality has risen massively in the last 30 years, especially in the last 5 years. So more of our wealth is held by fewer people who don't pay a lot of tax, so you and I need to pay more
Comrade Sam
Comrade Sam
Are you familiar with maths?
Britain creates more wealth now. Tax is lower - top rate under Thatcher was 90%
We are now the money laundering and tax haven capital of the world.
The gap between rich and poor is at its greatest, yet was at its narrowest in the early 1970s, during my lifetime. The vast majority of everything we all create ends up in the pockets of very few of us. There's enough for us all to have decent pensions, schools, hospitals, houses etc.
In the last 5 years alone those whom I'm not allowed to blame have spunked over £44b on HS2,
£12b on Smart meters, £18.8b on crossrail, £37b Track and trace, a basic estimate of £40b in lost revenue due to Brexit, useless PPE £8.7b,
Lost through COVID fraud £21b and on and on it goes. And none of this includes the billions cut in taxes for those at the very top of society. All the benefit and pay cuts barely measure against these giveaways.
Why don't you give me a trope about the boats, teenage vapers or benefit claimants.
We are approaching a Sri Lankan model and they discovered if you don't tax the rich you literally run out of money.
There speaks a man who has never spent an hour in a room of primary school age children
