Unemployment and the Pensionable age

Gorgeous_George

At the tender age of 47, I look forward to retiring one day. When this day will be is in a state of flux.

The State Pension Age calculator suggests I'll be 66 but the BBC reports that it may rise even higher. And there's 19 more years for the successive Governments to movethe goal posts again - and again.

On the other hand, unemployment remains a major issue. Not just the financial cost to our fragile economy but the personal impact to those affected.

Now, maybe my personal desire to retire is making me biased but it seems obvious to me that it would be better to employ younger people and let the elderly retire sooner. Sure, the young would be paying tax to fund pensions but the alternative sees old people paying tax to fund benefits.

Maybe reducing the working week to 4 days would be better. Those working could only earn 80% or what they earned when working 5 days but 25% more people could be employed - totally wiping out the need to pay unemployment and a raft of other benefits.

Is it me? Has the sun stroked my brain?

GG

jonewer

Well, pensions are already unaffordable. Dont see how its going to help making them more so.

IMO, the solution is to get a climate that allows for increased employment by making the UK a good place to do/start/base your business.

IveSeenTheLight

Gorgeous_George wrote: »

The State Pension Age calculator suggests I'll be 66 but the BBC reports that it may rise even higher.

Currently I'd be 67
That said, I personally believe we as a nation really need to consider being self sufficient in our pension age and therefore make it up to ourselves when the time is right.

I certainly do not intend to be reliant on the state pension.

IveSeenTheLight

Jusat a point GG.
While it sounds all nice, at least there is hope or a goal of getting people off benefits and into work.

jonewer

IMO I think the entire concept of retirement is redundant. In the old days people couldnt keep shovelling 16 tons of muck a day into their mid sixties. Since you dont have to shovel muck at all to make a living, theres no reason to stop working until you are physically incapable of doing so.

It was nice for a few years where people could sit back for a decade or two and do nothing but I think those times are gone. Not yours. Cant have.

wymondham

Personally there's no way I'm working past 60 odd regardless of rule and regulation..... you only get one life and I intend to enjoy it after my 'reasonable' working life has ended......

This is all regardless of if I can afford it ....... whats more important?

jonewer

wymondham wrote: »

Personally there's no way I'm working past 60 odd regardless of rule and regulation..... you only get one life and I intend to enjoy it after my 'reasonable' working life has ended......

Maybe so but the world doesnt owe anyone a living.....

wymondham

jonewer wrote: »

Maybe so but the world doesnt owe anyone a living.....

very true. If my outgoings are peanuts then I'll be ok!

jonewer

wymondham wrote: »

very true. If my outgoings are peanuts then I'll be ok!

Good luck to you! Wish I had your confidence that I will be doing the same.

lostinrates

I'm not confident there will be a state pension for me.

marklv

Gorgeous_George wrote: »

At the tender age of 47, I look forward to retiring one day. When this day will be is in a state of flux.

The State Pension Age calculator suggests I'll be 66 but the BBC reports that it may rise even higher. And there's 19 more years for the successive Governments to movethe goal posts again - and again.

On the other hand, unemployment remains a major issue. Not just the financial cost to our fragile economy but the personal impact to those affected.

Now, maybe my personal desire to retire is making me biased but it seems obvious to me that it would be better to employ younger people and let the elderly retire sooner. Sure, the young would be paying tax to fund pensions but the alternative sees old people paying tax to fund benefits.

Maybe reducing the working week to 4 days would be better. Those working could only earn 80% or what they earned when working 5 days but 25% more people could be employed - totally wiping out the need to pay unemployment and a raft of other benefits.

Is it me? Has the sun stroked my brain?

GG

Well, I wouldn't take much notice of journalists. Pushing the state retirement age to 70 would be controversial and enrage a lot of people. And I don't believe there is a need for it, anyway. What the government might do is not have an immediate increase to age 66, but go for age 67 instead. It's still below the big 70 but high enough to save plenty of money for the state. I also believe that higher rate tax relief on pension contributions will be jettisoned.

Personally, I think it's daft to force people to work into their late 60s. I was brought up believing that I would retire at 60 and enjoy my last years of decent health in peace and propserity. The government is now determined to prevent that and force us all to work into our graves. Why? Surely, 40 years of work should be enough to deserve a pension? Employers prefer younger people, anyway - even at 43 I am an oldie in my office!