How big should my pension pot be ?
Options
Comments
-
And who cares about what the Daily Muck writes?
The vast majority who read and believe what it writes I'd imagine. (I occasionally read it to see what they're up to these days, but that's about it - I certainly wouldn't rely on it to give an informed opinion about anything.)Conjugating the verb 'to be":
-o I am humble -o You are attention seeking -o She is Nadine Dorries0 -
What about the NHS? NI ostensibly pays for that as well.Perfect_Choice wrote: »Benefits are different to basic rights even for richer pensioners. I pay my NI to receive a state pension, if you don't pay me a pension, I don't expect to make any NI contributions then!
It's the same argument about the childless who complain about having to pay council tax for schools.
Anyway, the state pension is like a ponzi scheme. None of your NI goes towards your state pension. Your NI helps towards paying todays pensioners. Your state pension (if it's still there) will come from the taxes of the (then) working.Conjugating the verb 'to be":
-o I am humble -o You are attention seeking -o She is Nadine Dorries0 -
Perfect_Choice wrote: »Benefits are different to basic rights even for richer pensioners. I pay my NI to receive a state pension, if you don't pay me a pension, I don't expect to make any NI contributions then!
You do know what NI stands for, right?
It's insurance. What other insurance do you have where you get to claim unless you need to? If you buy house insurance and your house doesnt burn down, do you expect to get a payment anyway?0 -
What other insurance do you have where you get to claim unless you need to?
Whole of Life Insurance
When you take out a policy it is guaranteed to pay out.'In nature, there are neither rewards nor punishments - there are Consequences.'0 -
You do know what NI stands for, right?
It's insurance. What other insurance do you have where you get to claim unless you need to? If you buy house insurance and your house doesnt burn down, do you expect to get a payment anyway?
Not really. NI is not an insurance policy, it's a tax, just like income tax or any other tax. It's only called 'national insurance' because it is meant to be targeted at providing social 'safety net' benefits such as dole, basic state pension, etc. The government is not an insurance company! Also, read my post below.0 -
Perfect_Choice wrote: »Benefits are different to basic rights even for richer pensioners. I pay my NI to receive a state pension, if you don't pay me a pension, I don't expect to make any NI contributions then!
No, you pay NI to receive a wide range of 'safety net' social benefits, such as: dole, disability benefits, state pension, etc. Currently, the state pension is the only one of these benefits that everyone who is still alive at 65 (later to rise gradually to 68) will receive. There is no obligation for the government to continue paying the state pension to everybody, and infact it would better if it was treated not as an automatic entitlement, but as a benefit - it could be renamed 'old age benefit' or whatever. Why should people on lavish pensions or other high incomes receive £6k a year of taxpayers' money in old age? Is this not mismanaging public funds? Surely it would be better to make the state pension a safety net (as it should be) and use the savings gained to increase it to a more adequate level (say, £10k a year).0 -
Paul_Herring wrote: »The vast majority who read and believe what it writes I'd imagine. (I occasionally read it to see what they're up to these days, but that's about it - I certainly wouldn't rely on it to give an informed opinion about anything.)
The government should not be influenced by sections of the national press that are owned by shadowy vested interests and/or rich individuals.0 -
I know NI covers a range of benefits so let’s say reduced NI contributions then, why should I pay for somebody else's pension through full NI payments? It’s hard enough to contribute to your own pension and the basic state pension is a reserve everybody needs except the super rich.No, you pay NI to receive a wide range of 'safety net' social benefits, such as: dole, disability benefits, state pension, etc. Currently, the state pension is the only one of these benefits that everyone who is still alive at 65 (later to rise gradually to 68) will receive. There is no obligation for the government to continue paying the state pension to everybody, and infact it would better if it was treated not as an automatic entitlement, but as a benefit - it could be renamed 'old age benefit' or whatever. Why should people on lavish pensions or other high incomes receive £6k a year of taxpayers' money in old age? Is this not mismanaging public funds? Surely it would be better to make the state pension a safety net (as it should be) and use the savings gained to increase it to a more adequate level (say, £10k a year).
How about private pension investors have lost investments close up their retirement age or had their pensions schemes go bust, versus those public pensions which sit there contributing to higher council tax bills and drain on public finances (another controversial discussion point I know and another thread on this BB I've seen somewhere). Rather than limiting basic pensions, all public pensions should be moved to money purchase schemes going forward in my view, like the vast majority in the private sector.
The basic state pension is a safety net for easily 98% of the population I would say and is an essential component of everybody’s pension plans. It is certainly not an option to select who receives it and any government that suggested that would be thrown out of office at the next election for sure.
I’m not defending the super rich here but the vast majority of middle income earners who seem to be seen as the source of all income for others. You can only be sure of your pension income when you finally retire, don’t assume decent earning people today will have the financial resources when they retire to have a decent pension without the state pension (this sounds more crazy I think about it).
I’m doing reasonable well myself with my own private pension arrangements but I know colleagues who are struggling and have made investment mistakes. As long as you pay NI then I see the state pension most definitely as a right not a benefit.0 -
<<<I know NI covers a range of benefits so let’s say reduced NI contributions then, why should I pay for somebody else's pension through full NI payments? It’s hard enough to contribute to your own pension and the basic state pension is a reserve everybody needs except the super rich.<<<
NI is a tax, pure and simple. It goes towards funding social security, so it is a tax. if you think it's a kind of insurance policy, you are living in cloud cuckoo land. I'm not advocating that people on middle income pensions should have their state pension taken away, but a measure of means testing needs to be introuduced, otherwise it's not an efficient way of distributing public funds. Or would you rather see the state pension paid at 75?
<<<How about private pension investors have lost investments close up their retirement age or had their pensions schemes go bust, versus those public pensions which sit there contributing to higher council tax bills and drain on public finances (another controversial discussion point I know and another thread on this BB I've seen somewhere). Rather than limiting basic pensions, all public pensions should be moved to money purchase schemes going forward in my view, like the vast majority in the private sector.<<<
You sound like the editor of the Daily Mail! Would you honestly want nurses and teachers, who have to do thankless jobs with only modest rewards, to have their pension security taken away from them? Then who would want to do these jobs? For many in the public sector, the good pension benefits make up for the mediocre salaries, stressful jobs and lack of bonuses and additional perks. Other than doctors, who are a case apart, nobody who goes into the public sector does so for the money. I do believe that final salary schemes in the public sector should be replaced with 'career average' schemes such as the one now used in the Civil Service, but to introduce money purchase pensions would undermine the entire ethos of what being a public servant is all about. Not a good move, and would result in massive strikes and deep anger. Do you want that?
<<<The basic state pension is a safety net for easily 98% of the population I would say and is an essential component of everybody’s pension plans. It is certainly not an option to select who receives it and any government that suggested that would be thrown out of office at the next election for sure.<<<
It's not for you to make that decision. I believe most people would not care if the means testing only affected a small minority of wealthy pensioners.
<<<I’m not defending the super rich here but the vast majority of middle income earners who seem to be seen as the source of all income for others. You can only be sure of your pension income when you finally retire, don’t assume decent earning people today will have the financial resources when they retire to have a decent pension without the state pension (this sounds more crazy I think about it).<<<
You are missing the point completely. A person with a £40k a year pension is not 'middle income', but very much high income when compared to other pensioners in the country. Does such a person need fuel subsidies from the government and the £6k state handout? Of course not. And at a time when budgets need to be cut and state expenditure kept under control, it's only natural that those who do not need handouts should not get them.
<<<I’m doing reasonable well myself with my own private pension arrangements but I know colleagues who are struggling and have made investment mistakes. As long as you pay NI then I see the state pension most definitely as a right not a benefit.<<<
I would not advocate removing the state pension from the majority of people, but only - and in gradual steps - from the richest proportion only.
0 -
And how do you measure that?
People with the most in their pension pots may not be the most well off. Most peoples pensions are also split - so someone with a £50k pot may well be worse off than someone with 2x£30k.
Are you going to completely means-test everyone who reaches retirement age?
Quick - get this man into Labour Govt - we have a new quango...0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 343.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.7K Spending & Discounts
- 235.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 608.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 173.1K Life & Family
- 247.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards