Penalised for putting a 'bit by for your old age' no longer

wotsthat

I was reading somewhere that more boomers will outlive their children than any other generation in history as the generation behind them will be much more likely to be the victims of obesity related diseases, poor eating choices and higher alcohol consumption.

Best not tell Ruggedtoast.

CLAPTON

grizzly1911 wrote: »

Apparently life expectancy is now 10 years more from that in 70s (radio commentator today).

Why haven't we been seeing gradual incremental chipping away over the last 40 years rather than fundamental switch now?

I don't dispute that a percentage are living longer but I also believe that a far greater percentage have not seen a noticeable increase in longevity. I wonder how these figures are skewed by income.

Whilst we may have some better results from intervention in some cases obesity, heart, diabetes are on the rise.

IMO it is more about fudging the wider economic books than just age. By pushing it out we just delay the days of reckoning.

masses of research on this subject that can be accessed on the internet which will answer those questions

elantan

StevieJ wrote: »

Are you suggesting that they may reduce the pension for some from £160 to £140 and then take away all the extras like 'rent paid' somehow I think not

thats whats going to happen to me ... i will go from 160 to 140 when i retire

jamesd

It's really too soon to tell what they will do.

They could do silly things like deducting 1/30th for each year contracted out, hoping that people won't remember that the additional state pension doesn't stop accumulating after 30 years but continues to increase for as long as you're working and paying in.

Something like 1 / (number of years between 18 and state retirement age) reduction in the part above basic state pension per year of contracted out would be a better match.

Average earners and higher are the ones who'll be paying because the idea is to have them cross-subsidise the ones who've didn't pay in much or even anything. There's already some of that with the cap on how much income counts towards the Additional State Pension and the cap not increasing any more. Also with the higher rate at which those on the lowest incomes accumulate Additional State Pension compared to average earners.

macaque_2

vivatifosi wrote: »

macaque wrote: »

No. If you don't like it, do the same as with everything else round here, don't read it. Better still, stick me on ignore.

Hang on a minute, everyone on this list seems to be a bull?

bugslet (Today), CKhalvashi (Today), dtaylor84 (Today), elantan (Today), HAMISH_MCTAVISH (Yesterday), lostinrates (Today), LydiaJ (Today), morag1202 (Yesterday), Nikkster (Today), Out, Vile Jelly (Today), RenovationMan (Today), Rinoa (Yesterday), StevieJ (Yesterday), Thrugelmir (Yesterday), treliac (Yesterday), Wheezy (Today)

Bears only need to be told once (after that its nagging). I can see why electric fences are kept on aroung bull pens.

Please stay safe in a coma and if you find yourself in a coma remember the A-E of comatology.
A= asymmetry: lying in an asymmetrical position improves the changes of survival. If your thumbs and forefingers are neatly touching each other, your rescuers may think you are bullshi***g and call off the ambulance.
B = irregular borders, (see Israel and Palestine)
C= different colours: Never go towards the light. It's a trick and you won't come back.
D = diameter, If you fall into a coma keep your legs less than 30 degrees apart. There are lots of issues here.
E = evolving: if the room is evolving around you, don't panic this may only a Shiraz moment.

Most comas are worth between £10k and100k, any doubts please check and visit your claims lawyer

pqrdef

wotsthat wrote: »

I was reading somewhere that more boomers will outlive their children than any other generation in history

Must have been written by somebody with no conception of history.

And don't we also keep being told that kids born today can expect to see 100, or something, owing to massive advances in medical science etc?

jamesd

I expect that it's true if we exclude war.

DervProf

It's about time that saving for a pension, however small the amount, means that you will be better off than if you didn't save. My understanding is that people like myself, who save a modest amount into a pension (and are making other savings provisions for retirement), may actually not be much better off than if we didn't bother saving. Not only does it not seem fair that those who didn't bother to save get more help from the state than those who did bother, but it also is a big disincentive for many to not bother saving.

pqrdef

DervProf wrote: »

Not only does it not seem fair that those who didn't bother to save get more help from the state than those who did bother, but it also is a big disincentive for many to not bother saving.

Of course the alternative is that we waste money paying benefits to people who don't need them, who will then be seen taking public money and frittering it on inessentials.

kabayiri

DervProf wrote: »

It's about time that saving for a pension, however small the amount, means that you will be better off than if you didn't save. My understanding is that people like myself, who save a modest amount into a pension (and are making other savings provisions for retirement), may actually not be much better off than if we didn't bother saving. Not only does it not seem fair that those who didn't bother to save get more help from the state than those who did bother, but it also is a big disincentive for many to not bother saving.

The pension issue to me seems like the government is walking a tightrope having first forgotten their balancing pole.

There are many issues aren't there :

- you want people to save long term for retirement (as you say), but not at the consequence of getting into debt elsewhere

- increasing lifespan is not consistent across the country. People further North in the country consistently live shorter lives than their counterparts in the South. Should this affect pension provision?

- some people have genetic or working issues which also limit lifespan. (I am acutely aware of the asbestos cancer issue right now)

- you want people to have a basic comfortable retirement level. If pensioners can not cope some will end up in hospital, and that will prove even more expensive than pension provision

- pensioner voting power. I am sure the government is aware that pensioners are becoming the biggest voting block. Large numbers of pensioners in poverty will rebound on the politicians at the polls.

I am extremely doubtful that we can plot a 'fair' course from here to a new workable pension set up. There will be winners and losers along the way.