MSE News: David Cameron - We will give pensioners security and dignity

mgdavid

redux wrote: »

What do you mean?

People are obliged to pay national insurance contributions. They might assume that things will get there in the end, and don't necessarily need to keep a continuous running check.

There are some variations possible though. I know for example that one past employer never paid across the income tax and national insurance contributions he deducted from pay, so that makes him a thief. I was rather surprised that neither the Inland Revenue nor DHSS were interested in pursuing him. The DHSS said that in some such circumstances they might deem as if contributions had been made, but then they didn't do so.

Some people may have had periods of low earnings, in which there may have been exemptions from being compelled to pay contributions, but they may have chosen or may choose to pay voluntary contributions. So those people will be quite interested in exactly how many years are needed to qualify for a full state pension.

On the other hand, some people don't need to repeatedly check things like that which don't apply to them.

The sensible assume nothing and check everything.
You are free to do as you wish but please don't whine if/when things don't pan out as assumed and it's too late to change anything.

mgdavid

crin wrote: »

......

There is also the matter of being taxed on your occupational or private pension that you have contributed to throughout your working life and have given up a % of your income for many years only to be penalised and again be worse off than some who never have.
......

there is also the matter of getting full tax relief on every penny paid into pensions in the first place. Which no doubt you choose to ignore.

mgdavid

Pedalplodder wrote: »

I am one of the women born in the early 50's whose pension date (then calculated to be within 5 years) suddenly upped by a further 18 months! I had just been made redundant (cloaked as early retirement). How was I then supposed to fund a further 18 months?! To add insult to injury, they also swiped the bus pass (as if that'd save them much money)!

George Osborne is my MP so I've had direct dialogue on this - all useless and frankly unhelpful. As an MP, he is very "hands off" and uninterested in his constituency (surprise, surprise). In summary, I was told to get work (anyone want a 60+ woman without transport), that my pension eventually will be worth more (clearly wrong even with unbroken 37 years' of contributions in) and that we all have to feel the pain...

Changing the date of one's pension so close to the deadline is unacceptable. Those women who were entitled to the earlier pension date all started work when equal pay was not the norm, even those in the professions did not get equal pay till the mid 70's! So that £10,000 worth of pension swiped by the Conservative Government really does matter to us! Who knows what tricks they'll come up with in future!

Women banged on about equality for 50 years yet when you get it you don't like it.
Oh the irony!

tgroom57

The basic State Pension Triple Lock
For current pensioners, we have committed to increasing the basic State Pension each year by inflation, average earnings or 2.5% – whichever is highest.

I seem to be missing something here - average earnings is always going to be much more than inflation or 2.5%.
I would think DC means "the increase in average earnings" - but I would prefer him to say what he means, and not leave us to infer words that he may (or may not) have omitted.

Proof reader for hire?

trudger

Be able to keep what we have saved and spend it has we like. tosh!!? Because we have £1000 pounds savings between over the amount allowed {£10,000} we are having £2 deducted from our pension credit per week.They tell me that is the interest rate they calculate it at {£1 per £500 per week}. I have asked were on earth I could possibly get this rate but no answer seems forthcoming. Well take it out and spend it you say. Only if I supply justified ? expenditure reciepts is their answer.This money {as I have no other} is for emergencies and funeral costs. Saved after us both working for fifty years it has already been taxed and is now being taxed again and again. Wish I could could put mine in an offshore account.
As for the £950 a week rise in pensions were the heck did he pluck that figure from. The £148.40 they have come up with it seems to me will prove to be just as fairy story too when we get to it.

pillarrock

It is not right that people only qualify for the new State Pension minimum of £148.40 if they were born after the specified dates for men/women. People born earlier should also get at least that amount. As a current pensioner who has the maximum National Insurance contributions plus additional state pension (SERPS, GRP etc) I will still receive less than that amount. The new State Pension minimum should apply to ALL pensioners!

Del333

Whether your under the old scheme or the new scheme we all loose out.
I was born in 1955 and will be 60 next year and would have been able to claim my pension having worked full time all my life since the age of 16. BUT not now, I have to work until Iam 66. I have calculated that my pension LOSS in these 6 years will be in excess of £30,000 now that is criminal.
Cameron you are a robber please do not try and say that the system has been put in place to be fair and clear as this is totally not the case.
I also received a pension prediction stating I would be entitled to £113 per week, how does that work then compared to his statement of £148.40 per week.
I have never been unemployed, never been off work and never claimed benefits there's something wrong somewhere and then he expects us to believe him.

Thrugelmir

Del333 wrote: »

Whether your under the old scheme or the new scheme we all loose out.

No seems to answer the basic question though. Who is going to pay? Sooner or later breaking point will arrive if matters aren't addressed. Nor do politics come into the matter. As the issue is purely financial.

JezR

Del333 wrote: »

Whether your under the old scheme or the new scheme we all loose out.
I was born in 1955 and will be 60 next year and would have been able to claim my pension having worked full time all my life since the age of 16. BUT not now, I have to work until Iam 66. I have calculated that my pension LOSS in these 6 years will be in excess of £30,000 now that is criminal.
Cameron you are a robber please do not try and say that the system has been put in place to be fair and clear as this is totally not the case.

Your pension age was raised by 4.5-5 years or thereabouts as long ago as 1995 though, so you should have had no recent expectation of receiving a state pension at 60.

I also received a pension prediction stating I would be entitled to £113 per week, how does that work then compared to his statement of £148.40 per week.

Are you retiring before or after the new pension is introduced? It wasn't until very recently that predictions on the new pension have been available.

dunstonh

I was born in 1955 and will be 60 next year and would have been able to claim my pension having worked full time all my life since the age of 16.

If you were born 100 years ago you wouldnt have been able to vote. I am sure you are happy to have gender equality.

Cameron you are a robber please do not try and say that the system has been put in place to be fair and clear as this is totally not the case.

Why don't you educate yourself instead of making such stupid remarks. David Cameron wasnt an MP, let alone Prime Minister when your state pension age was increased from 60. He also wasnt responsible for the increase to 66. That was the previous Labour Government. He is responsible for bringing the timescale forward a couple of years to be more consistent with the recommendations of earlier reports commissioned by the Labour party.

I also received a pension prediction stating I would be entitled to £113 per week, how does that work then compared to his statement of £148.40 per week.

It is a projection. Not a prediction.

I have never been unemployed, never been off work and never claimed benefits there's something wrong somewhere and then he expects us to believe him.

Educate yourself and you may be less confused. Again, an option now that was not an option to most females until after the Victorian age. All these things that change are so bothersome.