Tory scum increase pension age - again!!

zagfles

Gracchus_Babeuf wrote: »

It is when you are already 65! :mad: This means that if I quit my job at 65 I'll have to drawdown £50-60k or so from my private pension just to keep me going until I am 67.

If you're already 65 you're unaffected.

And why would you need to drawdown £50-60k to replace one year's less state pension of around £5k?

crazyguy

98, 92 , 87 & 83

A._Badger

Gracchus_Babeuf wrote: »

What's your point? That we should just take it on the chin to please the government? If you believe that you're a fool. I would happily pay more NI contributions or income tax as long as I was guaranteed a decent state pension, the problem is that this Tory-Liberal govenment is ideologically committed to low income tax as a kind of religious doctrine. As a result, poorer people will suffer as a result.

I'm glad you think the 60% (or more) tax take in the UK is 'low'.

RichandJ

zagfles wrote: »

If you're already 65 you're unaffected.

And why would you need to drawdown £50-60k to replace one year's less state pension of around £5k?

I wouldn't expect anyone who starts a thread with "Tory scum" to be particularly rational.

zagfles

Gracchus_Babeuf wrote: »

What's your point? That we should just take it on the chin to please the government? If you believe that you're a fool. I would happily pay more NI contributions or income tax as long as I was guaranteed a decent state pension, the problem is that this Tory-Liberal govenment is ideologically committed to low income tax as a kind of religious doctrine. As a result, poorer people will suffer as a result.

Strange how income tax rates were at historically low rates for virtually the whole of Labour's time in power then. But don't let mere facts spoil your rant...

RichandJ

zagfles wrote: »

Strange how income tax rates were at historically low rates for virtually the whole of Labour's time in power then. But don't let mere facts spoil your rant...

I refer the honourable gentleman to my previous answer.

regprentice

vax2002 wrote: »

What percentage of manual workers live to be 67
The figures will shock ..

At present 19% of manual workers fail to reach 65 compared against 7% of professional workers.

At 65 the remaining life expectancy is 18 years for profs and 14 for unskilled. (these are for men)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/apr/21/life-expectancy-cheat-poor-pension

(yes i know it a guardian article, sorry, it was either that or the socialist worker....)

leveller2911

vax2002 wrote: »

What was the age of the last 4 people you knew who died ?

I'm a Carpenter & Joiner ,in the last 24 months I've lost 4 colleagues aged 52,54,60 and 62. All sadly suffered from the dreaded C.....all had Arthritis too

Personally I think anyone who works within a physically demamnding job should be able to retire at 65 as long as they have paid their full NI stamps.It is perverse to have rules where there is no allowance for wear and tear on the body.I agrre there are highly stressful jobs that take their toll but these are few and far between compared to construction/engineering/Agriculture etc ........

I was watching Breakfast news the other morning regarding the costs of childcare and was amazed to see a young single mum who works part time (respect to her for working at all).She takes home £800 per month and receives £880 per month through benefits (tax credits etc).I'm not sure if this included Housing benefit and Council tax benefit. So the young mum (probably mid 20's) has around £12k a year from the state and yet pays next to nothing in tax but someone who has paid in for over 40 years is paid peanuts for a State Pension..............Perverse ne sick......

sandsy

Gracchus_Babeuf wrote: »

What's your point? That we should just take it on the chin to please the government? If you believe that you're a fool. I would happily pay more NI contributions or income tax as long as I was guaranteed a decent state pension, the problem is that this Tory-Liberal govenment is ideologically committed to low income tax as a kind of religious doctrine. As a result, poorer people will suffer as a result.

I see no mention of increasing life expectancy and falling mortality rates in your argument. Over the last few years, life expectancy has been increasing at a rate of 2.5%-3% pa. The rate of increase is the fastest it's ever been. At age 65, a woman will now generally be expected to live beyond age 90 and men a bit under.

As the proportion of retirees grows and the proportion of workers shrinks, what else would you propose as a solution? Especially in a depressed economic scenario where the population are already suffering?

RichandJ

leveller2911 wrote: »

I'm a Carpenter & Joiner ,in the last 24 months I've lost 4 colleagues aged 52,54,60 and 62. All sadly suffered from the dreaded C.....all had Arthritis too

Personally I think anyone who works within a physically demamnding job should be able to retire at 65 as long as they have paid their full NI stamps.It is perverse to have rules where there is no allowance for wear and tear on the body.I agrre there are highly stressful jobs that take their toll but these are few and far between compared to construction/engineering/Agriculture etc ........

And if you allowed this which group would be next with their special pleading ?

They can also retire* at any time they please, they just can't access the state pension until whatever age parliament has decided upon.

* Subject of course to having enough income to live on. I'm not going to complicate this by saying said income should come from a pension, it doesn't have to.