State Pension Costs

CLAPTON

Thrugelmir wrote: »

That I would find surprising considering the level of debt this country is in. Also that most Corporate pension schemes are underfunded and in deficit.

Just to clarify

In Europe (Germany, France, Spain etc) most pension provision is made by the State and NOT provided by companies or individuals.

The state provision is much higher than our state provision and totally unfunded. They do of course pay higher taxes but thats a price they seems willing to pay.

sdooley

Much of the economic collapse of Iceland can be put down to that country's excellent, fully-funded, earnings-related, indexed state pension system. With state ownership of such a huge portfolio of assets and mass state funding of prime mortgages through the Housing Finance Fund there was very little space for the private financial sector in ordinary domestic markets - so surplus capital was directed to speculation. The pension scheme and HFF still work well, just about, but the rest of the economy's been wrecked.

I am wholly unconvinced that a funded state pension system is any more likely to be able to guarantee a good standard of living for future generations than one backed by the expectation that, as has been done since ancient times, the young will in turn look after the needs of the old. Any funded state scheme would require one generation at least to pay twice - or mass further borrowing to seed the scheme - either of which would cause a massive drop in GDP.

On the other hand a 'super' opt-out scheme like in Oz could be a good replacement for SEPRS/S2P.

bumpoowee

The state pension is going to be abolished eventually anyway so we may as well do it sooner rather than later. The generation of pensioners who deserve a state pension are dying out, the government should put a limit say year 19xx (designed to prevent the baby boomers from claiming state pension) and all people born after this date (with a few obvious exceptions disability etc) should provide for themselves.

I fully expect the state pension to be abolished by the time I retire so don't see why I should pay to fund it for the greediest generation in history, HPI, Final Salary schemes, Free University education which they pulled once they'd benefited from and now suggesting my generation should retire at 70 (despite my generation apparently being the first to be outlived by its parents) but of course making sure this doesn't affect them.. I could go on.

michaels

I still don't get it

The issue is the amount we will have to live on is the amount those working can produce and we is the workers plus everyone else.

The anticipated problem is that the ratio of workers to everyone else is likely to fall in the future - exactly how much depends on life expectancy, retirement age, migration, birth rate etc.

Talking about funding, pre funding, accounting or whatever other discussion of moving bits of paper takes place in a way makes no odds. The question is how big will the 'cake' of national output be and how will it be shared between those who are working to produce it and those who are not, including pensioners.

I don't think paper promisies made now, whether via Govt commitments or 'pension funding' will bear much impact on the outcome when push comes to shove - those working will have to give up more of what they produce - however much is gained from this will be shared between all those not working.

What might this mean in practice - much higher taxes on pensioners with high incomes, maybe new rules on annuities that have to be invested in 'pension bonds'. Further means-testing against assets etc

CLAPTON

bumpoowee wrote: »

The state pension is going to be abolished eventually anyway so we may as well do it sooner rather than later. The generation of pensioners who deserve a state pension are dying out, the government should put a limit say year 19xx (designed to prevent the baby boomers from claiming state pension) and all people born after this date (with a few obvious exceptions disability etc) should provide for themselves.

I fully expect the state pension to be abolished by the time I retire so don't see why I should pay to fund it for the greediest generation in history, HPI, Final Salary schemes, Free University education which they pulled once they'd benefited from and now suggesting my generation should retire at 70 (despite my generation apparently being the first to be outlived by its parents) but of course making sure this doesn't affect them.. I could go on.

bizarre

Baby boomers were those born 1945 to (say) 1955) so they are currrently aged between 54 to 64 ish give or take a bit.

If you believe that state pension and state education will be abolished by the time you come to retire then that will be the responsibility of YOUR generation... grow up and take responsibility for yourself and of your parents, your children and future of the planet.

ps. baby boomers grow up in unheated houses (no central heating); ice on the INSIDE of the windows in winter, walked everywhere (no cars), simple seaonal only food (nothing imported), few restaurants (no Indian, chinese, french etc), no foreign holidays (no holidays at all for most), 5% only going to Uni, no gap years, no mobiles, no internet, no cheap flights......

now tell me how hard done by you are by these parasites...

Sapphire

CLAPTON wrote: »

bizarre

Baby boomers were those born 1945 to (say) 1955) so they are currrently aged between 54 to 64 ish give or take a bit.

If you believe that state pension and state education will be abolished by the time you come to retire then that will be the responsibility of YOUR generation... grow up and take responsibility for yourself and of your parents, your children and future of the planet.

ps. baby boomers grow up in unheated houses (no central heating); ice on the INSIDE of the windows in winter, walked everywhere (no cars), simple seaonal only food (nothing imported), few restaurants (no Indian, chinese, french etc), no foreign holidays (no holidays at all for most), 5% only going to Uni, no gap years, no mobiles, no internet, no cheap flights......

now tell me how hard done by you are by these parasites...

Totally agree with you. People like this poster don't know how lucky they are in material terms, and despite this they whine constantly, much more than any of the 'parasites' you mention ever did despite the hardship that many of them incurred (and it was real hardship, though it didn't seem that way because people were satisfied with far less, families were closer, etc). Moreover, many of the people from that generation who I know are not affluent at all. Now they have to cope with their whining, spoiled, greedy brats as well...

LizzieS_2

bumpoowee wrote: »

The state pension is going to be abolished eventually anyway so we may as well do it sooner rather than later.

I suspect that part of your post is right. The problem is more and more think the same and are not bothering with private pension provision because the welfare minimum incomes are always deemed to be greater than the basic pension anyway - put simply why pay NI now only to find you cannot claim anything due to having made independent contributions elsewhere.

Governments should not penalise people for making the effort to save themselves!

JoolzS

I wonder if anyone who posts a rant about pensions in the UK has any actual knowledge. Both myself (currently aged 42) and my DH (currently aged 48) will not be entitled to claimed a state funded old-aged pension until we are 67! And that is both of us - I don't get five years off just because I'm a woman.

Stop whinging about people claiming pensions at age 65 when the government is already doing something about it!

Julie

baileysbattlebus

bumpoowee wrote: »

The state pension is going to be abolished eventually anyway so we may as well do it sooner rather than later. The generation of pensioners who deserve a state pension are dying out, the government should put a limit say year 19xx (designed to prevent the baby boomers from claiming state pension) and all people born after this date (with a few obvious exceptions disability etc) should provide for themselves.

I fully expect the state pension to be abolished by the time I retire so don't see why I should pay to fund it for the greediest generation in history, HPI, Final Salary schemes, Free University education which they pulled once they'd benefited from and now suggesting my generation should retire at 70 (despite my generation apparently being the first to be outlived by its parents) but of course making sure this doesn't affect them.. I could go on.

Baby boomers were born during the years 1946 to about 1964 (age 45 - 64). I would imagine you were brought up by 2 of them.

You'd better be quick if you want to stop baby boomer state pensions. The first wave of baby boomers is already retiring - especially women - those born 1946/7/8/9 will have already or will be able to retire now. Men will follow in a year or 2.

Most baby booomers did not go to university - a lot had to leave school to help provide financial family support. Although you moan about university fees - they provided the ability for most young people to have choice about further education.

Most people in their 50's will have worked for 50 years when they reach state retirement age. If you go to university now and retire at 68 you will have had a shorter working life than they have had. AFAIA, it was the Pension Regulator not the gov't who said the retirement age might need to be 70. I am a baby boomer who will be eligible for a state pension in 10 years - although I am not in favour of the abolition of the state pension (people without provision would still have to be funded by some means, unless you favour the reintroduction of the workhouse), I am not against a means tested state pension.

I know plenty of people who have made their own pension arrangements and plenty who have made none - not every boomer was a member of a final salary scheme.

Most boomers who own homes went through the last property crash and very many had their fingers badly burned. I think you will find it is mainly Generation X and Generation Y who fuelled the current boom and crash in the housing market.

Many boomers are also providing financial support to their children, grandchildren and parents, and often depriving themselves financially to do so.

TBH, you sound like a Generation Y - the "entitled to" generation.

Generali

kennyboy66 wrote: »

Because its not the accounting or recognizing the issue that is the problem, it is actually doing something about it.

Then again perhaps MP's really are thick as pig**it judging by this piece.

http://blogs.reuters.com/commentaries/2009/08/11/not-so-much-an-eagle-more-an-ostrich/?p=2440?tempedition=debatehub

By the wonderfully ascerbic Neil Collins, who is always worth reading.

It's a good point. Governments seem to have refused even to recognise there is a problem.

BTW the article refers to a GBP4,000,000,000,000 unfunded liability!