We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
Debate House Prices
In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 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!
The Forum now has a brand new text editor, adding a bunch of handy features to use when creating posts. Read more in our how-to guide
NHS should provide retirement housing
Comments
-
Loughton_Monkey wrote: »I can't see any problems with this at all. But then again, maybe reading the Guardian has warped my thinking....
I just checked with Polly Toynbee and John Humphries, and they said, no they're glad to see that reading the Guardian has made you see the light.No-one would remember the Good Samaritan if he'd only had good intentions. He had money as well.
The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money.
Margaret Thatcher0 -
You didn't pay enought tax to earn a state pension. When I use you, I mean the collective you, ie your generation. You personally could have paid far more tax than most.
Law of averages says you didn't pay enough tax though.
Tax doesnt pay state pension though, state pensions rely on
NI payments.make the most of it, we are only here for the weekend.
and we will never, ever return.0 -
Tax doesnt pay state pension though, state pensions rely on
NI payments.
It all goes in one pot. NI is not an insurance fund in any meaningful sense (cf Road Tax).No-one would remember the Good Samaritan if he'd only had good intentions. He had money as well.
The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money.
Margaret Thatcher0 -
In which case, earlier generations definitely didn't pay enough.
I think that you'll find that earlier generations, with the introduction of the welfare state, paid the pensions of their parents and grandparents, with the understanding that their children and grandchildren would likewise pay for their pensions.
Since then, however, due largely to the scientific advances made by people from those generations that you seem to despise, their (and your) life expectancy has increased by far more than the retirement age. Those now in their 50s should probably defer their retirement until their mid-70s to make their pensions affordable for their children.
Likewise, those in their early 30s (say born around 1981) should expect to work until their mid 80s for the sake of their children."When the people fear the government there is tyranny, when the government fears the people there is liberty." - Thomas Jefferson0 -
MacMickster wrote: »I think that you'll find that earlier generations, with the introduction of the welfare state, paid the pensions of their parents and grandparents, with the understanding that their children and grandchildren would likewise pay for their pensions.
Since then, however, due largely to the scientific advances made by people from those generations that you seem to despise, their (and your) life expectancy has increased by far more than the retirement age. Those now in their 50s should probably defer their retirement until their mid-70s to make their pensions affordable for their children.
Likewise, those in their early 30s (say born around 1981) should expect to work until their mid 80s for the sake of their children.
That's absolutely right. But we have a cake-and-eat-it situation. The younger generations seem to expect to have the latest i-Pad as soon as it hits the Apple shops, stag and hen weeks in Barcelona at the drop of a hat etc etc, and still retire on a good pension at 55 without having paid any more in tax or contributions than they do now. It is too politically unacceptable for any major party to hammer home the message that this can't and won't happen as strongly as it needs to be.No-one would remember the Good Samaritan if he'd only had good intentions. He had money as well.
The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money.
Margaret Thatcher0 -
If you think later generations will seriously have extended life expectancy you must already be suffering from dementia. How the hell are we supposed to have a meaningful retirement from 70? How about the boomers forgo expensive medical treatments for at best, a dubious few years of extended longetivity? This is a decision that WILL be forced upon you at a later stage anyhow when later generations wake up and realise how screwed over they have been.0
-
GeorgeHowell wrote: »That's absolutely right. But we have a cake-and-eat-it situation. The younger generations seem to expect to have the latest i-Pad as soon as it hits the Apple shops, stag and hen weeks in Barcelona at the drop of a hat etc etc, and still retire on a good pension at 55 without having paid any more in tax or contributions than they do now. It is too politically unacceptable for any major party to hammer home the message that this can't and won't happen as strongly as it needs to be.
You ally ar quite mental if you think that's how the younger generations live. Despite earning over 60k a year, I haven been on holiday, never mind an overseas holiday for over 3 years.0 -
If you think later generations will seriously have extended life expectancy you must already be suffering from dementia. How the hell are we supposed to have a meaningful retirement from 70? How about the boomers forgo expensive medical treatments for at best, a dubious few years of extended longetivity? This is a decision that WILL be forced upon you at a later stage anyhow when later generations wake up and realise how screwed over they have been.
No. You won't have a meaningful retirement from 70. It will be from 85.
When the old age pension was introduced, those lucky enough to claim it could expect to do so for an average of around 5 years before then shuffling off their mortal coil. As a 31 year-old male, your life expectancy will probably be around 90, so your retirement age should be 85.
By the way, ask your grandparents how many foreign holidays they took at your age. 3 years since your last one probably won't seem so bad."When the people fear the government there is tyranny, when the government fears the people there is liberty." - Thomas Jefferson0 -
If you think later generations will seriously have extended life expectancy you must already be suffering from dementia. How the hell are we supposed to have a meaningful retirement from 70? How about the boomers forgo expensive medical treatments for at best, a dubious few years of extended longetivity? This is a decision that WILL be forced upon you at a later stage anyhow when later generations wake up and realise how screwed over they have been.You ally ar quite mental if you think that's how the younger generations live. Despite earning over 60k a year, I haven been on holiday, never mind an overseas holiday for over 3 years.
I think the above sentiments clearly demonstrate flawed thinking regarding "generations". When a 'generation' comes aboard planet UK, it has no control whatsoever about (a) how it will be brought up by parents, (b) what financial crisis (or boom) UK is going through at the time, and (c) what the government of the day is doing (or not doing).
As part of one generation, I can only recall growing up, behaving 'reasonably' normally compared to my peers, and got educated, went to work, and paid every penny tax I was asked for.
But here's the difference between you and I. Despite earning £60K+, you are looking to the government to tell you when to retire! Basic State Pension is £107.45 a week for gods sake. Are you saying that you are not funding enough investments/savings to give you a decent income whenever you choose to retire?
Look at it another way. In all probability you will draw just as much state pension in real terms as anyone of my generation. Longevity has seen to that. So what is there to moan about? Are you wanting state funded holidays now?
Some of us just got on with it. Lived through governments, tax regimes, and economic situations of every shape and colour. Paid what we were asked. And many of us chose to retire early at a 'sacrifice' of simply not spending everything we earned. I put this down to me and not the specific time I was born, nor what the other 9 million individuals of my generation did.
If my own pension age had been raised, say, to 67 or 68, it would have had a minor impact on income, but well within the flexibility I have in my forecasts.
Why not take personal responsibility for your finances, and live within the swings and roundabouts of life like most individuals do?0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 354.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 254.3K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 455.3K Spending & Discounts
- 247.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 603.8K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 178.4K Life & Family
- 261.3K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards