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

Mrs_Arcanum

Problem is the current system penalises those who work. Currently if you have been unable to work for enough time and only qualify for pension credits you get MORE than someone who has worked all their lives. This will finally get rid of this anomaly.

jamesd

Gettingeven wrote: »

Personally, from what I can deduce, longevity is a load of claptrap. People are not really living much longer, there are just more people living longer, which is not the same thing. People who reached age 65 some 50 years ago probably still went on to live until @ 77/78, and the lifespan is not that much more for people reaching 65 now.

Your deductions need rework when you look at the data.

1981 life expectancy for 65 year old man: 14 years woman: 18 years
2012 life expectancy for 65 year old man: 21.6 years woman: 24.1 years

Increase for a man in 33 years: 4 years
Increase for a woman in 33 years: 2.5 years

Go back the other 13 years and the increases get larger still. Half of people are expected to live at least as many years as given by the numbers.

Numbers are from the 2008-based central projection cohort life expectancy table.

What those mean is that the expected pension payout time for a man has increased by 28.5% in 33 years. Those extra years have to be paid for somehow.

Gettingeven wrote: »

One of my grandfathers, born in the 1890s, died at 82, my other grandad died at 99 and one-half!

That happens. So does dying early of smoking or in a more dangerous car in an accident or heart attack or may of the other things that kill people before they make it to those ages.

Gettingeven wrote: »

All of this reforming of the pension system is just another way of cutting costs by the government.

It's a way of keeping the taxes that we will pay lower as the big baby boom generation both retires and lives longer than the smaller generation whose less generous pensions they were paying for.

jamesd

Mrs_Arcanum wrote: »

Problem is the current system penalises those who work. Currently if you have been unable to work for enough time and only qualify for pension credits you get MORE than someone who has worked all their lives. This will finally get rid of this anomaly.

It'll replace it with another anomaly, removal of the incentive for those on low incomes to save for retirement. That's because of the quite high level it's being set at, which makes adding more unnecessary.

Gettingeven

jamesd wrote: »

Your deductions need rework when you look at the data.

1981 life expectancy for 65 year old man: 14 years woman: 18 years
2012 life expectancy for 65 year old man: 21.6 years woman: 24.1 years

Increase for a man in 33 years: 4 years
Increase for a woman in 33 years: 2.5 years

Go back the other 13 years and the increases get larger still. Half of people are expected to live at least as many years as given by the numbers.

Numbers are from the 2008-based central projection cohort life expectancy table.

What those mean is that the expected pension payout time for a man has increased by 28.5% in 33 years. Those extra years have to be paid for somehow.

That happens. So does dying early of smoking or in a more dangerous car in an accident or heart attack or may of the other things that kill people before they make it to those ages.

It's a way of keeping the taxes that we will pay lower as the big baby boom generation both retires and lives longer than the smaller generation whose less generous pensions they were paying for.

Past stats showing increased longevity have to be analysed within their context, and any projections should be taken with a pinch of salt.

Much of the increased longevity, such as it is, has been due to improvements in public health, sanitation, vaccinations, therefore I would think that the effect of this will level off. Medical science is becoming very good at helping us to live longer (for many, living longer in poor health). For many of us, in our 70s, it's all downhill, I'm afraid!

Have a look at this paper from the States regarding obesity and diabetes. Unchecked, it's going to cause a massive problem for health services, but it will also have the 'benefit' of reducing the cost of state pensions! Obesity is a major problem here in the UK, and I doubt very much that the 'projections' for longevity you provided a link to include this factor. Those projections just 'assume' that a rate of increase in longevity will apply. Look around your local KFCs and McDonalds - you can see that it wont!

http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMsr043743#t=article

ffacoffipawb

macaque wrote: »

.
Dear Mr Vivatifosi

Is there any possibility that you could remove this preachy health message on each of your posts? I come on this website for light relief and if melanomas are going to get me, they are going to have to get in the queue. Its a bit like going to a resaurant and ordering steak only to have the waiter say; "how would you like it cooked sir, and by the way, here is a picture of advanced colonic cancer. Maybe you might prefer the vegetarian dish sir". The bottom line is that I would prefer to enjoy life to full and conk out before I become dependant on the tyrrany of underfunded social services.

Yours sincerely

Macaque

Off topic maybe, but it could just save your life.

jamesd

Gettingeven wrote: »

Past stats showing increased longevity have to be analysed within their context, and any projections should be taken with a pinch of salt.

Of course. If you want non-projected numbers just go and look at the period numbers for past years - those are based on the ages that people really died at, with no projection for future changes added. Those won't support your view either.

Gettingeven wrote: »

Much of the increased longevity, such as it is, has been due to improvements in public health, sanitation, vaccinations, therefore I would think that the effect of this will level off. Medical science is becoming very good at helping us to live longer (for many, living longer in poor health). For many of us, in our 70s, it's all downhill, I'm afraid!

The leveling off may happen but there's still significant progress being made.

Gettingeven wrote: »

Have a look at this paper from the States regarding obesity and diabetes. Unchecked, it's going to cause a massive problem for health services, but it will also have the 'benefit' of reducing the cost of state pensions! Obesity is a major problem here in the UK, and I doubt very much that the 'projections' for longevity you provided a link to include this factor. Those projections just 'assume' that a rate of increase in longevity will apply.

The projections include such factors

Any saving in pension costs due to diabetes will be more than eliminated by the costs of treatment, whether it's pills near the start or help with blindness, loss of limbs and such at the other end. It's a major threat to the health budget.

coastline

Gettingeven wrote: »

Past stats showing increased longevity have to be analysed within their context, and any projections should be taken with a pinch of salt.

Much of the increased longevity, such as it is, has been due to improvements in public health, sanitation, vaccinations, therefore I would think that the effect of this will level off. Medical science is becoming very good at helping us to live longer (for many, living longer in poor health). For many of us, in our 70s, it's all downhill, I'm afraid!

This is what I've said myself...some people are living longer but many won't see retirement if 70 yo is normal pension age..
I've posted on other threads about real grafters at work...will they be fit enough for the task...maybe its ok in a nice cosy office..
Over the last three decades many people have never reached retirement...they were out the door with generous redundancy packages...or even none at all and found themselves placed on sickness benefit to keep the unemployment figures low..
When was the last time you saw a regular retirement presentation....not very often...maybe this has kept many alive but these doors are closing now..
Maybe we need pension reform...but I'm not sure how many will cope at work after 60 yo...

jamesmorgan

Gettingeven wrote: »

Personally, from what I can deduce, longevity is a load of claptrap. People are not really living much longer, there are just more people living longer, which is not the same thing. People who reached age 65 some 50 years ago probably still went on to live until @ 77/78, and the lifespan is not that much more for people reaching 65 now.

In 1948 when the state pension was introduced, average life expectancy was 66. This meant that on average the state pension was payable for 1 year. Of course, in practice those that reached the age of 65 received a pension for much longer than 1 year, but this was balanced out by many people who didn't get to 65 and received nothing. Many of those people will still have paid NI during their working lives (although some, admittedly, will have died in childhood and paid nothing).

With average life expectancies now around 80 (ie 15 years post-65), something has to change. It is not 15 times more expensive as much fewer people die in childhood, but it is clearly a lot more expensive that the system originally conceived. Back in 2002 it was calculated that if the system continued to mirror that established in 1948 the retirement age would need to be set at 74. No doubt in 2012 that age should be even higher. I struggle to see how we can afford to keep it as low as 67.

RenovationMan

I can see people living longer because of advances in medical care but having much diminished quality of life as more people are registered as disabled, tubs of lard pottering about on those motobility scooters, barely alive.

mcc100

RenovationMan wrote: »

I can see people living longer because of advances in medical care but having much diminished quality of life as more people are registered as disabled, tubs of lard pottering about on those motobility scooters, barely alive.

As a regular visitor to a residential home I have to agree.

I have no desire to live into my 80's and will be taking early retirement as soon as possible.

Fortunately I am lucky enough to have a final salary pension so will hopefully be in the privileged position to do so.