Forum menu
Two related articles from today's Grauniad...
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2024/feb/05/its-national-sickie-day-ill-health-uk-econony-ons
TLDR: Too few working people paying tax, too many sick people not paying tax, ergo retirement age must rise (but not in an election year).
TLDR: Too few working people paying tax, too many sick people not paying tax,
And too many perfectly healthy wealthy individuals who neither work, nor pay tax.
It's either this or a wealth/property tax I think (which is one of the theoretical problems with the UK economy - too much money tied up in property and thus not economically active).
Don't think property taxes or raising the pension age will be electorally popular, and the other issue is the amount of free childcare provided by retired grandparents due to lack of adequate provision.
Not enough immigrants. Need more to support the tax base. Up yours Farage.
To be honest I read that this morning and it pretty much echoed my thoughts in that retirement is going to be a thing of past for a hell of a lot of people, if you're struggling to eat/pay rent or bills/save for a deposit you're unlikely to be tucking away money for your retirement.
Younger people, their research has found, do not have the financial assets that their parents and grandparents did. In 2010, those under 40 held £7.53 of every £100 of wealth. By 2020, that had fallen to £3.98. One-third of the UK’s 14 million Gen-Xers are at high risk of retiring on insufficient income.
Can't imagine why the above might happened :rollseyes:
I must admit, after it went up to 67 I started feeling like retirement might always be just out of reach for me.
Not enough immigrants. Need more to support the tax base. Up yours Farage.
The Tories keep harking on about growing the economy whilst refusing to fund the NHS to bring down waiting times and get more people back to work and also refusing to allow immigration...
Very joined up policy making....
I don't see a problem with it being 71. There's no good reason why old people who are well can't work, the whole concept of a healthy retirement at your leisure is recent - the idea of state pension was to compensate people too old to work (a bit like sick pay) and it wasn't intended to pay out to most people, only those who happened to get old - it simply didn't keep up with how long people were living.
There’s no good reason why old people who are well can’t work, the whole concept of a healthy retirement at your leisure is recent
Maybe so, but it's quite a hard sell when people were expecting to retire at 60/65 etc for decades and then suddenly find it's 71 / 75 / 84 etc
Maybe so, but it’s quite a hard sell when people were expecting to retire at 60/65 etc for decades and then suddenly find it’s 71 / 75 / 84 etc
for that reason, it simply won't happen like that. Regardless of what some "researchers" think, the only way (politically) to do this is punt the number up for those not yet in work or only just started work
I don’t see a problem with it being 71. There’s no good reason why old people who are well can’t work
When people (me) have been paying a not insubstantial amount of NI, which is supposed, in part, to be for the state pension, it's a bit of a bitter pill for the goalposts to keep moving until they're beyond reach.
5lab
Full MemberI don’t see a problem with it being 71. There’s no good reason why old people who are well can’t work
I have quite a good reason, I don't want to. If you want to carry on, by all means!
Why is this country so uniquely shit amongst similar nations in Europe, that we have both one of the lowest state pensions and highest pension ages?
for that reason, it simply won’t happen like that. Regardless of what some “researchers” think, the only way (politically) to do this is punt the number up for those not yet in work or only just started work
But it's been done before - 65 to 67 which happened well into my working life. Why won't it happen like that again? Maybe not straight to 71 but I can absolutely see them incrementally moving the goalposts by a couple of years at a time for those in work now.
Years ago 65 as a retirement age was about 50 years after many entered the workforce, many doing manual jobs. With most not entering the workforce until 18 years old, many not until 22, and doing jobs which are sedentary in nature, is retirement at 70 not unreasonable?
and doing jobs which are sedentary in nature
But an awful lot still aren't. Do we have a two tier pension age for binmen and scaffolders versus IT consultants and call centre workers?
I love how, as a nation, we are prepared to accept not only a worse pension than most comparable nations, but also a government under which life expectancy has fallen noticeably trying to push the retirement age upwards.
Do we have a two tier pension age for binmen and scaffolders versus IT consultants and call centre workers?
Surgeons? Airline pilots? Truck drivers (given that the risk of collision goes up substantially if the driver is >70)?
There is absolutely no way I’d be able to do my job at 71.
Sure I could retrain, but what non physically demanding jobs will be left with AI allegedly taking over?
not claiming that bumping it up isn't a tough pill to swallow, but the money has to come from somewhere.
The state pension was introduced the age was 65 (for men) and life expectancy (for someone born that year) was also 65. If the numbers had been correctly managed the current state pension age would be 81.
Yet another reason for a country in misery.
But it’s been done before
Yeah. All the WASPIes might disagree.
The current economics just dont work, harsh fact but its a reality. Theres an ever increasing percentage of working age economically inactive, and increasing amount of wealth tied up with fewer people and a lot of people in the middle paying for other peoples lives and combined with the ever increasing cost of living cant afford to plan their own retirement. Politicians have known this has been coming for years but like social care there are no easy answers so they've ignored it and kept the electorate generally ignorant of the realities.
Tell me - those of you saying 70/71 is reasonable: do you expect this to affect YOU or is your assumption that it will only affect younger people than you? If it will affect you - are you saying this because you expect to still work to 71 or because you believe you've made good enough plans to retire on private pensions?
With most not entering the workforce until 18 years old, many not until 22, and doing jobs which are sedentary in nature, is retirement at 70 not unreasonable?
My job is entirely sedentary but so stressful/chaotic I can't imagine doing it into my 50s, let alone 70s!
This vindicates my decision to seek out an easier life now at the expense of salary, rather than wait for retirement (that, and the males on my dad's side of the family expiring at an average age of 67... 🙄).
Years ago 65 as a retirement age was about 50 years after many entered the workforce, many doing manual jobs. With most not entering the workforce until 18 years old, many not until 22, and doing jobs which are sedentary in nature, is retirement at 70 not unreasonable?
Well I, like many others started work at 16.
Maybe so, but it’s quite a hard sell when people were expecting to retire at 60/65 etc for decades and then suddenly find it’s 71 / 75 / 84 etc
Dunno if it marks me out as Bougie but I'm under 40 and don't even consider the state pension in my retirement planning. If it's there when I get there it'll be bonus and probably end up needing to be spent on healthcare costs anyway.
interesting reading from those who actually make the decision here (from last year)..
my crib notes are they'll give you 10 years notice of a change (which isn't a huge amount), and they kicked the can down the road in 2023 to make it a problem for the next government, due to inflation and covid.
Tell me – those of you saying 70/71 is reasonable: do you expect this to affect YOU or is your assumption that it will only affect younger people than you? If it will affect you – are you saying this because you expect to still work to 71 or because you believe you’ve made good enough plans to retire on private pensions?
I'm 41. I expect the state pension age will rise for me, and I'm not financially planning on it being a big part of my retirement income (as in, I suspect it will be means tested). I'm planning to retire at 58, my biggest upset is if they continue to bump the age at which you can access a private pension pot in line with state (historically it's been pegged at 10 years below state pension age), I guess if that happens I might have to work an extra year.
is retirement at 70 not unreasonable?
How do those 18-22 year olds get into the job marketplace if the 67-71 year olds are filling up the top end, there's a knock on effect with only so many jobs in the system.
The big problem for me is that by increasing the age, you are effectively destroying many peoples dream, they work for 50 years, they retire and enjoy life for a few years before they become infirm or die, you take that away, and mental health will suffer for many (more!). My dad ran after a bin lorry for his adult life, if he had to go further than 65 it wouldn't have been pleasant, he had illnesses towards the end, hernias, msi stuff and you'll just push more into an early grave, which will save money i guess.
The sad fact is how we've gotten to this, and at the same time as we see a generation of retirees who retired at 60, had final salary pensions and so on it's grating to have to work until 67/68, let alone being in your early 20s and knowing you're never going to retire, and have to work now with a huge tax burden that's partly paying for those who got to retire 20-30 years ago.
It’s either this or a wealth/property tax I think (which is one of the theoretical problems with the UK economy – too much money tied up in property and thus not economically active).
I think there is another way (or at least partially to plug the gap):
You stop paying NI when you reach retirement.
Older people are more likely to need care, NHS etc so actually are proportionally quite a big "burden" on the things NI was set up to cover (even if you don't include the pension). It seems to me that getting rid of the NI exemption for retirees would raises a significant amount. It would not hurt the poorest pensioners because if you only get state pension you are below the NI limit.
I’m 50. I’ve thought for a while now that I’m unlikely to be retiring at 68, because the numbers just don’t add up.
I’m sorry for anyone that this is news to, but 68 was always a political compromise.
If anything for Gen X (myself) I don’t think it’ll even be 71, because as we don’t have the political clout that the boomers do, and the generations behind us are more likely to be struggling, I think that any form of retirement if you’re still able to do productive work is likely to have to be entirely self funded.
Younger people, their research has found, do not have the financial assets that their parents and grandparents did. In 2010, those under 40 held £7.53 of every £100 of wealth. By 2020, that had fallen to £3.98. One-third of the UK’s 14 million Gen-Xers are at high risk of retiring on insufficient income.
I think we need to look deeper, the inequality runs across all ages and we need to see the spread of assets as I suspect it'll show us how they are congregating at the rich 'end'.
Politicians have known this has been coming for years but like social care there are no easy answers so they’ve ignored it
See also why local government is in a mess - many of the things we think of that they provide are 'discretionary' and social care and emergency housing, which aren't, hoover up the budget.
I must admit, after it went up to 67 I started feeling like retirement might always be just out of reach for me.
Its like Catch 22. Literally. When Yossarian gets to 24 missions, the number he has to fly gets raised from 25 to 30, when he hits 29 somehow still alive, it gets raised to 35, when he gets to 34...
On along enough timeline the chances of survival are zero. Keep raising that age until the whole concept of retirement is exclusively the reserve of the rich. You work til you drop or see your life out in abject poverty
See also why local government is in a mess – many of the things we think of that they provide are ‘discretionary’ and social care and emergency housing, which aren’t, hoover up the budget
Isn't it presently 75%+ of councils budget? Thats only going to go up.
Maybe we can start packing old people off to Rwanda too? Actually... they're probably already focus grouping that...
But it’s been done before – 65 to 67 which happened well into my working life
Indeed, I didn't check my NI for ten years, checked back in and my retirement age increased by TWO years. I've also just paid my 35 years of NI, so am done with accrual of benefits - until it increases to 40 years. Of course I enjoy what I do and probably won't ever fully retire, but then I don't have a hard manual labour job and am in full control of my mental faculties. Such people are the one who should be retiring earlier not later.
Yeah good job workplace pensions are getting better...oh wait. Prospects for younger folk are getting worse and worse in this country. Whole system is very efficiently funneling wealth to the few.
It’s also not just about the financial situation, it’s about the demographics of having enough people active in the workforce to keep things going.
As for AI replacing people, so far it’s magical thinking IMO.
I'm 31, pretty much everyone my age and 5 years up expects to get no state pension anyway. I don't even think it would be a political suicide by this point most of us have mentally checked out of expecting that.
But we don't vote anyway in substantial numbers so it's even less of a vote loser.
Maybe so, but it’s quite a hard sell when people were expecting to retire at 60/65 etc for decades and then suddenly find it’s 71 / 75 / 84 etc
It absolutely ****s those in the middle that have been prudent enough (and had enough income) to put a shed load of their pay into a pension, and have planned on retiring at a point in time, only to have it moved.
Case in point... me. I've put between 20 and 35% of my wage into a pension for 30+ years - rather than spaffed it away on booze / fags / prostitutes. On the basis of a defined retirement age. It's called PLANNING. Pity the morons running the country can't plan too. Because ever since I was born, it was predictable when I'd reach 65.
But they'd rather give it in tax breaks to the millionaire tory party donors and the corrupt rather than normal people that they have been taking the £££ off.
(Given me half my NI contributions back from the last 40 years and I'll take the pension age rise).
I’ve put between 20 and 35% of my wage into a pension for 30+ years – rather than spaffed it away on booze / fags / prostitutes
It’s never too late to start 😉
It absolutely **** those in the middle that have been prudent enough (and had enough income) to put a shed load of their pay into a pension, and have planned on retiring at a point in time, only to have it moved.
other than the 10 year rule (ie you can't access the pot more than 10 years ahead of the retirement age, which hasn't been kept up-to-date with recently) - any shifts in state pension age shouldn't impact your ability to access your private pot.
I’m struggling to do my job now and been off sick got the longest I ever have due to that. Working to 71 is an absolute no for me. <br /><br />
And too many perfectly healthy wealthy individuals who neither work, nor pay tax.
How do you not pay tax?
I don’t see a problem with it being 71. There’s no good reason why old people who are well can’t work
Well as taking up jobs that younger people could do, working at 71 for many in physical jobs or those that require quick decision making while under huge amounts of stress is ridiculous to think it’s ok
A few thoughts from me:
- there are so many jobs that a 70 year old would find really physically challenging. Teaching for example. Does that mean a huge increase in sickness and early retirement on grounds of ill health payments?
- will people working longer not fill the jobs many younger people need? And yet on average, an older person is wealthier and likely to have somewhere to live. Storing up more issues.
- why make people work longer when part of the issue can be solved through reduced tax avoidance, getting ill people better quicker and therefore paying tax, spending taxpayer money responsibly, reducing the wealth tied up in housing etc etc.
Of course all this takes a strong vision of a country, responsible government and much political determination.
Oh.
Wait.