PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING

Hello Forumites! However well-intentioned, for the safety of other users we ask that you refrain from seeking or offering medical advice. This includes recommendations for medicines, procedures or over-the-counter remedies. Posts or threads found to be in breach of this rule will be removed.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!

Preparedness for when

Options
1290629072909291129124145

Comments

  • moneyistooshorttomention
    moneyistooshorttomention Posts: 17,940 Forumite
    edited 15 February 2015 at 3:50PM
    Now racks brains...because somewhere or other I read about the money set aside specifically for State Pension payments (ie from our NI stamps) as being an account that's actually in surplus and by quite an amount too. Apparently the trouble is that account keeps getting raided and used for other things (sort of equivalent of using the grocery money to buy make-up in my terminology).

    From memory...that was the gist of what I read.


    Of course the cynical little thought has often crossed my mind that the path is now "nearly open" to euthanasia on demand (something I personally firmly believe in) partly for the humane reasons we are being told - yay!

    But....I am far from unaware that it would suit the Government too if people were able to freely say "Up with this (ie a major level of ill health) I will not put...where's the way out?" Reason being because they wouldn't have to find the money to fund the high healthcare bills of people who had made their own personal decision to "opt for the Exit" rather than put up with incurable ill health.

    Very very much a matter of individual personal choice....but I can see exactly why the Government is moving in the direction of this being possible...and its for their own reasons (ie and not out of "common humanity and not wishing to see people suffer against their will") and, almost incidentally, saving money on the State Pension bill.
  • I'm now wondering when our State Pensions (in their present-day form) came into play. Wasn't it around the 2nd World War time? I know my memory of history is patchy to say the least.......:o

    Now wondering how many people would have been aware at around that time that we would soon have the means available to restrict our own personal birth rate and realised that would come along in the very near future and thus population decline (well....it would have been presumably - if it weren't for our way-too-permeable borders). I would think the "frontliners" would have realised at that point in history that effective birth control/legal abortion weren't very far away. I wouldn't have know (being a stage further back in the Knowledge Queue so to say) but I would have thought Mega Minds in High Places would have known at around end of WW2 time (even if they hadn't been able to pinpoint it down to the 1970s when this would come).

    Had this argument the other day with my (rather older obviously) parent as to when people like me would have known the 2nd World War was coming. I argue I would have known at around 1930 and taken action accordingly (ie moved to the country), but she couldn't see it would have been possible to "know" until 1938.
  • daz378
    daz378 Posts: 1,051 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 500 Posts Name Dropper Combo Breaker
    they say Blair is the son Thatcher would have wanted ......if the people feel too abandoned.....they may either lurch left or right to the marginal parties ukip/snp though i couldnt see how anyone under 50k a year could vote for a far right party like ukip..... but each to their own........worried whether il get a pension being just a year shy of 50....fingers crossed
  • Hello All

    Im still reading the thread but havent had anything interesting to say recently.
    I'm the same age as daz378 and for a while have been thinking I probably wont get a pension or a very reduced one. I do pay into my own pension but again never going to be rich.
    I have put my money into two very cheaply bought buy to lets which I rent out via a Credit Union bond scheme to tenants who are homeless/at risk of being homeless/have "chequered" pasts. Hopefully I will have enough money to buy another one in the future. I do work part time and help OH with his business. What I am trying (badly) to say is I am not putting all my eggs in one basket or putting faith in the government providing a pension.
    One of my main worries is having a low income when I am older. Working for a Credit Union I see this daily with pensioners taking loans out to cover extra winter bills or to buy household appliances as they have no savings or emergency money.

    Again I think a combination of living frugally, being prepared and building SHTF stocks now will help in the future. Making sure I have no debt is also important to me as I hate to owe anything to anyone.

    Anyway I've rambled but just posted to say Im still here.

    PS Just sorted all my veg seeds and I,m embarrased at the sheer quantity! In my defence many were freebies or 20p specials at the end of the season sale.



    "Big Al says dogs can't look up!"
  • Errrm...I think the reason many could vote for UKIP is because of not seeing them as "right wing", still less "far right" - but as the only party serious about our all-too-permeable borders (well...bar the National Front of course:eek::eek:) but they are another thing altogether.

    The trouble is that there IS no answer to "Which of the 3 main parties is it possible to vote for to get our borders closed?" and the reason for that is because all 3 of them are likely to leave them wide open....

    Put like that...and it does rather come over as Hobsons Choice in effect...the lesser of all available evils school of thought.

    Well...unless you want to vote for a nationalist party then...perfectly possible in some parts of Britain obviously...

    Hence...available options realistically do rather boil down imo to 2 options, with the other being Green Party. Or, of course, an Independent (if there is one).
  • mardatha
    mardatha Posts: 15,612 Forumite
    Daz the SNP aren't a "marginal" party up here.... am just sayin lol ;)
  • ivyleaf
    ivyleaf Posts: 6,431 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts
    My take is the Government (ANY Government) wouldn't dare come back for another go at any woman in the 60 plus agegroup. I was shocked and astonished when they came back for another go at woman in their 50s. Fortunately, I missed that and have kept my original "revised State Pension Age"...whew! But I definitely thought/think its appalling that they took a hit at women as old as in their 50s by shifting the goalposts on them again:eek:. I wouldn't put it past the Govt to hit women in their 50s again with a goalpost shift, but past 60th birthday = Safety Zone against that I would say.

    I'm only too glad I'm in the 60 plus age group and add fact I have retired at Retirement Age (ie 60) and those goalposts are WAY too close for them to even think of hitting a woman my age again (ie for a 2nd time) and I would say it would count as positively inhuman to hit those slightly-younger-than-me but now over 60 women for a 3rd time.

    Thank goodness the rest of my pension turns up at last later this year, so there is no way any Government (no matter how desperate they are or say they are could come for us again ...with only months to go). Unless they really wanted to come up against "One of us would be dead if they tried...and it wouldn't be me;)".

    I was born in Oct 1953 and am one of a fairly small group of women who actually had their State Pension age changed three times - from 60, to (in my case) 62-and-a-bit, to 65-and-a-bit. There was such a furore about this last one being implemented too late for us to do anything to make extra provision for retirement that it was changed again, on a sliding scale, and in theory I should get mine when I'm 64 and 7 months-ish.

    There is confusion about whether women who won't be entitled to the full "flat rate" (How can it be a "flat rate" if not everyone's going to get the same amount?) will still be able to get a bit more pension based on their spouse's NI contributions, or whether that idea's being swept away...
  • ivyleaf
    ivyleaf Posts: 6,431 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts
    moneyistooshorttoomention I think the "old age pension" was introduced "between the wars". Originally it wasn't payable until the age of 70, so lots of people died before they ever got their pension.

    ETA Just checked; it was January 1st 1909, so even earlier than I'd thought! it was between 10p and 25p (2 shillings and 5 shillings) and was means-tested.
  • I think you have it right ELAINE definitely the ability and skills to make provision for any future at all and then to make the best of what you DO have and the situation you find yourself in and to appreciate that actually having anything is a positive will keep you buoyant in hard times. No one is guaranteed a rosy future but if you can keep your head above water and 'see' your way through adversity by the skills and experience you have already it must give you a better chance of making it through the hardest of times and find some sort of sustainable lifestyle afterwards.
  • Frugalsod
    Frugalsod Posts: 2,966 Forumite
    Tenth Anniversary Combo Breaker
    nuatha wrote: »
    I love an optimist.
    I wouldn't even consider "in receipt" to be safe.
    Though to be fair I suspect that many private pension schemes are also on the verge of bankruptcy as well. There does need to be reform of all pensions schemes private and public.
    nuatha wrote: »
    Unfortunately the Government got it seriously wrong with state pensions from the beginning. No provision has ever been made for paying out future pensions, the assumption has always been there would be sufficient income to pay current requirements and that would always be the case. Two of the many problems being, no account was made for an increase in birth rate or a decrease in the amount of people paying full time contributions in addition to a rise in life expectancy - the system is technically bankrupt, it doesn't have sufficient assets to pay its liabilities.
    The rising pension age because of life expectancy is essential and it should be closer to 75 anyway.

    The fact that the national state pension scheme is a pay as you go scheme is not an issue. This is one mistake of many who state that we have massive unfunded liabilities in our state pension scheme. They completely ignore the future income from the current and future generations to pay the pensions. It only becomes an issue when like the London Fire service pension the whole fire service head count goes down in cuts in that there are insufficient people contributing to the pensions. The closest this would be would be in Ireland where they also have a pay as you go state pension but a sizeable percentage of the working population have emigrated. So now will be problems decades ahead. Same for a couple of the Baltic countries as much as a third of the population have emigrated.
    It's really easy to default to cynicism these days, since you are almost always certain to be right.
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 351K Banking & Borrowing
  • 253.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 453.6K Spending & Discounts
  • 244.1K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 599K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 177K Life & Family
  • 257.4K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.6K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.