State pensions should be slashed

dunstonh

nashly wrote: »

I think you need to re look at your figures, government spending purely on pensions alone is higher than health welfare or defence, in 2014 it will be 144 billion pounds.

I think you need to check your figures. I got mine using the 2011-12 data

http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2012/dec/04/government-spending-department-2011-12

The first post was about the state pension. Not all pensions the Govt is liable for (eg Civil Service) or pension related credits/benefits. So, are you now changing your position?

margaretclare

Cast your mind back to 1909 - that was when what were then called 'old age pensions' were invented. The idea wasn't original, I believe it came originally from Bismarck in Germany. They were very basic and were intended that people, once they were physically incapable of work, could live independently and not have to go into the workhouse. I've read an account of old people 'weeping with gratitude' as they tottered along to the post office to draw out the small amount that would pay their rent and keep them out of the workhouse. Whole generations still, in my youth, talked about 'having to go into the workhouse' even though workhouses were abolished in 1930. If you read any of the census returns once they're published - latest was 1911 - you'll see that people were still doing hard physical jobs long after it would be considered desirable or physically possible. I had a relative who was labouring in a stone quarry at 70. I had another relative who died in a workhouse infirmary. Unemployment benefit is meant to be temporary i.e. between jobs. Retirement is long-term.

DH and I worked, and therefore paid full NI contributions, for all of our adult lives. As others have said, once you can no longer work you do still have expenses.

This kind of argument makes me angry. So what do you want us to do - all of us commit suicide en masse?

smartn

nashly wrote: »

And don't forget a lot of them are the boomers that got this country into high debt as well with extortionate house price rises and easy credit, I think it's time they paid back society and be ashamed as well for what they have done.

Sorry, But I am going to bite with this one as it just seems plainly wrong. The vast majority of pensioners have paid in to a system for many years in the understanding that they will get something back when retired from the state.

The state pension is just about enough to live on when you take in to account the cost of the essentials of food, warmth and a roof over your head. Pensioners do not qualify for the multitude of benefits that are available to the unemployed.

State pension should not be means tested as people have paid in for it over the years but there should be an option for the very wealthy to opt out if they wish.

seven-day-weekend

stix62 wrote: »

Oh my, and here's me thinking it's the government and the bankers that are screwing this country over and leading us up the creek paddleless when it's the o.a.p's all along!

benefits and pensions are the biggest drain?
that's comical :T

It's Pensioners and/or Baby Boomers. I fit into both categories

Dunroamin

smartn wrote: »

Sorry, But I am going to bite with this one as it just seems plainly wrong. The vast majority of pensioners have paid in to a system for many years in the understanding that they will get something back when retired from the state.

The state pension is just about enough to live on when you take in to account the cost of the essentials of food, warmth and a roof over your head. Pensioners do not qualify for the multitude of benefits that are available to the unemployed.

State pension should not be means tested as people have paid in for it over the years but there should be an option for the very wealthy to opt out if they wish.

Actually, they do.

(Although I agree with your post.)

p00hsticks

margaretclare wrote: »

Retirement is long-term.

And there is the nub of the problem. When originally introduced in 1908 the state pension was essentially a) short term (it was only for those over 70, well above the life expectancy at the time, although this was skewed by infant mortality) and b) means tested (you did not qualify if your annual income from other means exceeded a certain amount).


Nowadays many people expect to stay in full time education until their early twenties, but still look to retire in their sixties (or even fifties) and with increased life expectancy this means that they may spend only half their lives working

peterg1965

nashly wrote: »

And don't forget a lot of them are the boomers that got this country into high debt as well with extortionate house price rises and easy credit, I think it's time they paid back society and be ashamed as well for what they have done.

I think you will find that it is Governments that have overspent and Government policies which led to successive housing booms. A little unfair to be blaming individual 'boomers' I think and as far as being 'ashamed for what they have done' would you care to expand on that? I could equally say that those that rely totally on the State Pension as their sole source of income should be equally ashamed for not having made any provision for their retirements - not my view but an extrapolation of your sentiment.

margaretclare

Dunroamin wrote: »

Actually, they do (qualify for the benefits available to the unemployed)

....but these benefits are means-tested. Not all pensioners qualify for means-tested benefits e.g. if they also have work-related pensions, annuities from savings etc.

prowla

nashly wrote: »

down to unemployment benefit rates as state pensions are the biggest drain on this country by far, as the government states that a single or couple can live on unemployment benefit then why can't pensioners who don't have to spend money looking for work and probably eat less than younger people live on the same rates ?

It would save the UK from a catastrophe that the pension bill will cause.

What a stupid post; people pay into the state pension, and if there is a shortfall then it is down to the mismanagement of consecutive governments.

Pensioners aren't spongers, they are people who have earned the right to be taken care of in their latter years and have invested in the system to do that.

(In my case, I hope to work til I die, so it's possibly academic for me!)

Jennifer_Jane

ognum wrote: »

Also to be devils advocate maybe it should be means tested.

Just to add that the very rich are "means-tested" in a way. The State Pension is taxable and the tax regime reduces tax allowances so that ultimately the very rich are paying the same tax as anyone else.


https://www.gov.uk/income-tax-rates