New pensions freedom under attack before they start

Bootsox

Torry_Quine wrote: »

As the state pension age continues to rise it makes sense for the age at which you access a private pension to also rise. Personally I think this applies only to those who are rich enough to retire early, the norm amongst my circle is that the state retirement age is the age when you retire.

You do realise that the state retirement age is an arbitrarily derived number?

Torry_Quine

lvader wrote: »

The private pension retirement is already set to rise with the state pension. I'm not rich and I've made significant sacrifices to retire early, setting the retirement age to 60 would force me to divorce my wife in order to rescue my plans (she is 5 years older)

Even 60 is very young to retire these days so yes you would need to have a lot of money to live comfortably from that age allowing for life expectancy. I sincerely hope that your divorce comment is hyperbole. Many people can only dream of retiring when they reach state retirement age.

zagfles

atush wrote: »

Well we wont have to be worried about the pipsqueeks mentioned, as Labour (plus the SNP I assume) will be rolling back the whole thing and putting restrictions back in place- so they say.

Have they actually announced that or is it speculation?

TCA

I thought Glenda Jackson was retiring from politics. Last time I saw her on TV she was on The Muppet Show. This commission is just more of the same.

Torry_Quine

Bootsox wrote: »

You do realise that the state retirement age is an arbitrarily derived number?

Arbitrary it may be but it's the age that is considered the normal one to retire at unless health means you have to stop working earlier.

Dunnit

More changes because some people cannot be trusted. I am another where divorce would be the best option if this is adopted.

Dunnit

Torry_Quine wrote: »

Arbitrary it may be but it's the age that is considered the normal one to retire at unless health means you have to stop working earlier.

Most jobs do not have a retirement age.

I cannot think of any relative who gave up work at the same time as they drew their state pension.

Women in particular are likely to be tied to their husbands because the husband is likely to have bigger pensions through better pay, longer contributions through no breaks for children and women being caught by restarting work in newer later paying schemes.

Orwell

You can email them by clicking on their names in the report and that takes you to their website entry which includes their Email address. I don't see any reason not to email them whether you live in their constituency or not. After all this committee is presumably setting a national policy.

Orwell

Torry_Quine wrote: »

Even 60 is very young to retire these days so yes you would need to have a lot of money to live comfortably from that age allowing for life expectancy. I sincerely hope that your divorce comment is hyperbole. Many people can only dream of retiring when they reach state retirement age.

Frankly, I will be fairly happy if I can keep my job until 60, I cannot imagine working beyond that age in my particular occupation which is fairly stressful and doesn't have that many "oldies" in it (since so many of the jobs have been transferred to India).

nearlyrich

Torry_Quine wrote: »

Even 60 is very young to retire these days so yes you would need to have a lot of money to live comfortably from that age allowing for life expectancy. I sincerely hope that your divorce comment is hyperbole. Many people can only dream of retiring when they reach state retirement age.

Some of us have been planning and saving rather than dreaming my DH is retired and I want to sped some quality time with him.