New flat rate pension

wotsthat

GeorgeHowell wrote: »

One day your pension will be funded by the younger people of the day, that's the way it works. Or don't you plan on living that long ?

I'd usually say something similar.

In this case though I reckon younger people are going to get the shaft. They are going to have to pay more in, for longer to get a smaller pension.

The government are launching a new pension scheme - because they want to give people more money? Don't think so - the new scheme will save money partly from being simpler to administer but mainly because the benefits will be lower for most.

Meanwhile one group of recently retired people are wittling that another group retiring after 2017 will get more benefits than them - might be a self-awareness bypass there.

posh*spice

GeorgeHowell wrote: »

One day your pension will be funded by the younger people of the day, that's the way it works. Or don't you plan on living that long ?

I am more than happy to fund my own pension out of my own earnings- I don't know why I have to pay for the boomers pensions just 'cos they couldn't be asked to save.

Fella

purch wrote: »

Looks like all those SERPS payments were one of my poorer "investment" decisions :eek:

Some people absolutely detest putting money into pensions for precisely that reason: that you have no idea what future Gubmints will do to the money. I can see their point. Just investing outside a pension has a lot of advantages.

grizzly1911

posh*spice wrote: »

According to the BBC you get a percentage say 31/35



I suspect it's a con to get us all to pay more tax:cool: Another condem cunning plan

Pennywise wrote: »

There's plenty of talk about needing 35 "qualifying" NIable years (ie work or SAHM), but nothing about what happens for those who havn't worked, or havn't got 35 Niable years.

Surely there'll still be a safety net for those too, otherwise they'll be penniless. So, it seems there's still no real incentive to work rather than skive?

Also, what about the other state benefits, i.e. rent - presumably "poor" pensioners will still get their rent paid as £150 is still inadequate to pay rent as well as all other costs.

So, it doesn't seem as if it is a replacement for current means testing as it's claimed to be?

That was what I was getting at PW but NI will go up for millions now.

Pennywise

grizzly1911 wrote: »

That was what I was getting at PW but NI will go up for millions now.

Could well be the first stage of scrapping NIC and increasing income tax instead.

At the moment there are too many "anomalies" surrounding NIC for it to happen - breaking the link between earnings and state pension is a good start, as is getting rid of the reduced rate NIC for contracted-outs.

grizzly1911

Fella wrote: »

Some people absolutely detest putting money into pensions for precisely that reason: that you have no idea what future Gubmints will do to the money. I can see their point. Just investing outside a pension has a lot of advantages.

We have always discounted any likely state pension and a good proportion will be lost under claw back.

On top our own pensions we have made separate provision to give flexibility and also to give us capital to do with as we choose.

That has meant doing without some things along the way but I am glad we did.

Jennifer_Jane

posh*spice wrote: »

I am more than happy to fund my own pension out of my own earnings- I don't know why I have to pay for the boomers pensions just 'cos they couldn't be asked to save.

If we hadn't spent 45 years or more working and (NI) contributing towards the pensions of our elders, then that would be fine. We did, you are doing it, and your children will be, or are, doing it.

I sent money from overseas to do it, so I would have made other choices with that money. I deliberately funded the State Pension I have with money sent to the UK. So I definitely deserve my State Pension. It was part of my pension planning, and I also have a small private pension.

Things changed before I received my pension - the 30 year qualification (unfair for me because I needed 39 and men needed 42 years); the fact that up to my year, people could update their qualifying years, but not for my year or upwards (unfair that I couldn't upgrade my pension); the fact that I could receive my pension at 60 which was unfair for others, but beneficial to me (although I chose to defer to 62 as I continued working longer, so have "lost" those years' pension receipts, in order to receive a marginally higher weekly pension).

Lots of things have been "unfair" on people, you just have to accept that. Some things are better for you and some things are worse for people.

mystic_trev

Jennifer_Jane wrote: »

Lots of things have been "unfair" on people, you just have to accept that. Some things are better for you and some things are worse for people.

Probably the best comment made on these Forums today.

mystic_trev

GeorgeHowell wrote: »

If people in that group were to defer taking their pension until 2017 when the new rate comes in, I wonder whether they would get the new fixed level or something still based off what they would have got at 65, and it if is the new level whether they would be better of deferring.

No, you can't. Someones already asked this on the Pensions Forum.

Niv

I like the idea of knowing what to expect at retirement from the state pension, the problem being there will be multiple sets of elections between now and when I retire so the only thing i know for certain is that nothing is certain.

Also it is pointless going on (like some do) about this is unfair on me, I lose out, others do better than me etc. There is no answer out there that will be universally benefitial to all, there cant be, we simply cant afford it. So what we (well whoever gets voted in) has to try and do is balance. If I know I will get ~£150 pw once retired I then can plan for any extra on top of that which i would like to have a more comfortable retirement (easier said than done of course).

Many people I speak to that are around my age do not seem to care much about their pension provision, more concerned about having the latest tablet (sigh). The younger generation (which I still hope to be concidered part of) need to wake up and realise that they need to think / plan for their retirement now (at least in part) and stop harping on about 'the boomers' (which of course in many cases is their own parents!).

Niv