my dads private pension

peterg1965

Shaunyboy you clearly live (or wish to live) in some Socialist Utopia. I, for one, have not worked hard all my working life to subsidise someone who lives for the moment, cannot be bothered to make provision for the future (be it by investing in pensions, property or simply saving) and relies on the taxpayer (State) to completely fund his/her retirement in toto.

Shaunyboy

Peterg1965,

I live in the real world like millions of other low paid workers. Wake up and smell the coffee.

I have told you my Dad's experience...incidentally he worked hard all his working life, just like you.

I have learnt that it was not worth it for him to put money he really needed at the time into a pension. It was a waste of money. He was simply throwing his money down the drain. However, the value in him spending the money at the time on his family are incalculable.

It is time the pensions industry and all those in it realise that for low paid workers the daftest thing to do is put money away in a pension. This is the reality of the situation whether we like it or not peterg1965.

seven-day-weekend

Shaunyboy, how do you know that the State is going to keep sudsidising pensions?

I for one would not base my retirement incone on that, especially if I was not going to retire for another 40 years!

As it happens, I will get my State Pension in 2010 and my LA pension in 2014 and actually I will not be a lot better off than if I hadn't bothered. I will get basic SRP (opted out of SERPS) and about £40 pw LA pension. But it is all mine, will remain mine and no-one can take it away and I don't have to answer to anyone for it, fill in any forms, show anyone my bank account or jump through any other hoops.

Well worth it in my opinion. I don't have to keep watching my back.

Shaunyboy

Hi seven-day-weekend,

I hope you enjoy your retirement.

I know the state will keep making sure the poorest pensioners don't starve because thats what civilised states do. It would be politically impossible for any government in the future to stop paying a pension.

Indeed, I reckon future governments will be spending more on pensions in the future than in the past, see previous post.

If you're happy knowing that your pensions are about the same as someone else who did not pay into a pension, well great.

Thats OK everyone's happy. Have a good one!

peterg1965

In a 'civilised state' people should not be entirely dependant on handouts. The Welfare state (and in that definition I do not include the basic state pension, which most people earn as of right after paying years of NI contributions) is there as a safety net for the most needy. That does not include people who cannot be bothered to help themselves when they are in a position to do so. People retiring now did not have the benefit of the national minimum wage and other employment legislation to protect their rights thorughout their working lives, people retiring in the years to come have had that luxury, therefore no excuses for not planning for the future. There will always be a small genuine minority that need the State to help and support them, this is what the Welfare State is designed to do.

jamesd

Shaunyboy, that 11.25 would be for an average of about 26 years. If Pete does better than a basic stock market tracker and gets the extra 100 a week I have a feeling that he'd be more pleased with the result.

Terry might be quite unhappy if pension credit is abolished ten years from now, or if rates fall to no more than basic survival levels for those on benefits. Basic survival is about all that the state is expected to guarantee on benefits. Pensions are a different matter: pensioners are entitled to what their pensions are worth.

Hopefully both get more than 10 a week in additional state pension. I didn't check what it might actually be.

Shaunyboy

Peterg1965,

You have a very strange concept of the welfare state if you don't include the pension. That is one of the most important tenets of the welfare state.
It is indeed the ultimate safety net for the needy, ie people that are too old or unable to work and support themselves.

I'm not sure what all this nonsense about people not being bothered to help themselves when they are in a position to do so is about.

I am talking about the working poor. People working on or around the minimum wage who struggle with the bills as it is. For them it is not a case of not bothering but more a case of not being able to while living and frankly more than deserving a half decent life for 50 working years. For these people throwing money they can ill afford into a pension is totally pointless and wasteful. Just ask my old man.

Jamesd,

In the real work most 18 year olds earn nowt. They go to University and rack up £30,000 of debt by the time they are 21 or 22 so forget the saving in a pension until about 21 or 22 for starters. This is when the fun really starts.

They get a low paid job and are expected to pay these debts back as well as save up for a small house, you know the £250,000 efforts for a rabbit hutch in Ipswich...oh and put money in a pension that may/or may not go up in value etc etc we have all read the warnings!

There isn't a cat in hell's chance of any government getting rid of the £30 top up from the pension and pension credit amount. No doubt they will tinker and call it something else but it would be politically impossible. Indeed it has already been announced that the state pension in the future will be going up by average earnings and not inflation, thus increasing state pensions even more. cushty.

Sorry Guys....it ain't gonna happen.

dunstonh

I am talking about the working poor. People working on or around the minimum wage who struggle with the bills as it is.

You mean those that have 2-3 takeaways a week, top sky package, get their housing paid for, go out boozing and smoking and don't give a damn because the taxpayers are paying for it all?

Or the small minority who genuinely need help?

Indeed it has already been announced that the state pension in the future will be going up by average earnings and not inflation, thus increasing state pensions even more. cushty.

Being paid for by reductions in SERPS/S2P and the increase in state retirement age to 65 initially for women and the progressively to 68 for all. I wouldnt be surprised to see pension credit and personal allowances following the increase in ages. Along with pressue to increase public sector retirement ages.

There isn't a cat in hell's chance of any government getting rid of the £30 top up from the pension and pension credit amount.

Forced enrolement into the NPSS will come at some point. It is probable that the take up rate initially will be high enough for the Govt to bring in compulsion at some point. When that happens, you can kiss goodbye to pension credit as you will be earning above the amount needed to qualify.

In that case, you will benefit from what you save and if you dont it will be your own loss. Just as it should be.

I don't buy your arguement that most people cannot afford a pound a day to save for themselves.

seven-day-weekend

Shaunyboy wrote: »

Hi seven-day-weekend,

I hope you enjoy your retirement.

I know the state will keep making sure the poorest pensioners don't starve because thats what civilised states do. It would be politically impossible for any government in the future to stop paying a pension.

Indeed, I reckon future governments will be spending more on pensions in the future than in the past, see previous post.

If you're happy knowing that your pensions are about the same as someone else who did not pay into a pension, well great.

Thats OK everyone's happy. Have a good one!

We are already retired in our 50s.

Actually, that is just MY pension. My husband also has pensions in his own right, one of which he is receiving already and has done so from the age of 55. He will get his State Pension in 2014.

Both our Pensions have lump sums as well, and if one of us dies, the survivor gets half their Occupational Pension.

So you see, it IS worth it to save. Why should we want to rely on State Benefits?

(And anyway, what's the point of being UNhappy about it? I'm not going to ruin my retirement worrying because someone else gets State Benefits and I don't!)

Paul_Herring

Shaunyboy wrote: »

1) Pete earns £150 a week and pays the £6 per week NPSS from the age of 18 to the age of 68. So that is an amazing 50 years of paying into a pension scheme on top of all the usual income tax, NIC and day to day expenses.

Pete earns £3.75 an hour and isn't getting any extra help from the government during his working life? He doesn't have any prospect of a wage rise? He doesn't increase the £6 during his working life?

Your arguement is unrealistic.

In fact I seem to recall seeing a similar thread to your arguement on The Fool... I'll have a look later...