The economics of pensions - what should the country do?

lisyloo

However, even before this it would have been impossible because relatives all work, and there are other, personal reasons that I cannot go into why it couldn't happen.

You don't need to explain to me.
My MIL can be really vile and that's very difficult for immmediate family members to deal with. The professionals can deal with it because they are emotionally detached.
There are practical difficulties dealing with old people these days (the bathrooms they have for a hoist plus wheelchair plus 2 carers are enormous), but the more difficult part is dealing with someone who's vile or distressed.

I hope your m-i-l's affairs get sorted out soon and that they not too stressful for you.

The practical aspects - like deputyship, selling the home are time-consuming but not difficult.

The most difficult aspect by far for her children is both that they have lost their mother, but also that she can she can distressed and can also be vile.


Neither of them know how they are going to cope emotionally when she gets worse and that's when not if (SIL has been on the edge of a nervous breakdown for a while). Both are finding it difficult to plan their lives e.g. holidays having had MIL fall and then in hospital, FIL fall, in hospital then die.


Glad you got the POA in time. My MIL didn't want anyone else to be in control and still doesn't.



We all work, have kids or don't live nearby but we all know it would be impossible to cope emotionally.

Sapphire

lisyloo wrote: »

You don't need to explain to me.
My MIL can be really vile and that's very difficult for immmediate family members to deal with. The professionals can deal with it because they are emotionally detached.
There are practical difficulties dealing with old people these days (the bathrooms they have for a hoist plus wheelchair plus 2 carers are enormous), but the more difficult part is dealing with someone who's vile or distressed.

The practical aspects - like deputyship, selling the home are time-consuming but not difficult.

The most difficult aspect by far for her children is both that they have lost their mother, but also that she can she can distressed and can also be vile.

Neither of them know how they are going to cope emotionally when she gets worse and that's when not if (SIL has been on the edge of a nervous breakdown for a while). Both are finding it difficult to plan their lives e.g. holidays having had MIL fall and then in hospital, FIL fall, in hospital then die.

Glad you got the POA in time. My MIL didn't want anyone else to be in control and still doesn't.

We all work, have kids or don't live nearby but we all know it would be impossible to cope emotionally.

That's exactly it. I wouldn't say our relative is vile. She had an incredibly difficult life early on, in her youth. Her close kin were killed during the war under horrible circumstances, and after the war she had precisely nothing materially. She wasn't taught or equipped to deal with having children, but they were her lifeline after all she had lost, and controlling them and everything around her was the only way she could keep a grip on life (a doctor once said to me that her own mother had said to her, 'Don't destroy the fortress I've built around me', and it was a similar self-protective thing with my relative).

That aspect of her behaviour hindered the children, but she did instil certain values and ethics in them that have helped them in life. She was also often very kind, for example to strangers who were in trouble, or to an animal that needed rescuing, as long as her 'fortress' was not being attacked and was not threatened. It's sort of a Dr Jekyl and Mr Hyde situation. She still tries to apply the control now, for instance when someone is trying to answer a question from her very simply, and she doesn't understand the answer (she never does now), at which point she becomes aggressive. So the best thing is to just listen to her mad rambling (which she does at length), smile and not respond, or just say, 'Yes'. Asking any question just produces a blank look. Yes, it is all very stressful for everyone, and having to deal with an uncaring official body compounds things.

I have just been on the phone about this issue with my sisters, with one device held against one ear and the other against the other ear.:o

It has helped being able to communicate with you; thank you again.

Tromking

kabayiri wrote: »

A Head of Department teacher friend has just retired at 55, and this person told me the pension was 30K per annum.

They don't have a habit of lieing....so why wouldn't this be true?

Another example...there is a an ex-policeman/police trainer not far from here, who retired early 50s. Police work is supposed to be physically limiting beyond this age, and yet now he does physical painting and decorating work. He can afford to undercut the youngsters too, on rate.

How isolated these examples are I can only surmise.

I didn’t mean to say people are not able to retire now at 55, I said such schemes have not been available (for new joiners etc.) for over 30 years in my experience. For example, the generation of Prison Officers before I joined in 1987 could retire at 55, my NPA is 60, and new joiners now are now able to draw their full pension at their SPA. Like I said, a diminishing issue.

chucknorris

ilovehouses wrote: »

To get a £30k pension from the teachers scheme at 55 they would need to have 35 years under their belts and be on a final salary of £90k. They'd also get a lump sum of £94k.

According to Barclays Finance the range of pay for a HoD is between £29k & £64k.

Maybe it could be true but, if so, it's obviously very far from usual.

They may have bought additional pension within the TPS (Teachers Pension Scheme), it is very good value. I bought the max allowed (£6.2k) in the scheme that (mostly) ended in 2015. When I join the newer scheme in 2020 I can once again buy more additional pension, although as I only work one day per week now, I will only have enough relevant income to buy up to about £3k before I reach state pension age.

Andy_L

ilovehouses wrote: »

To get a £30k pension from the teachers scheme at 55 they would need to have 35 years under their belts and be on a final salary of £90k. They'd also get a lump sum of £94k.

Or they could be on the later scheme that gave 1/60ths without a lump sum and a salary of £50k.

In either case, unless it was a redundancy/medical retirement, situation they'd have a further reduction for taking it 5-10 years early which would require a higher salary to give £30k

zagubov

I'd agree that most teachers won't be retiring on anything remotely near £30k. That would need remarkable planning and investment even though their pension scheme's pretty good.

kinger101

Clifford_Pope wrote: »

No, it's spot on and at the heart of any meaningful debate about how to provide pensions.

Imagine a small self-contained island economy entirely managed by a committee of the islanders.
They are self-sufficient in fish and coconuts and yams, and have no imports or exports.
When a person reaches 70 he retires, and then contributes nothing to the economy until he dies aged 80.

I won't even bother to imagine it because it's a fallacy. Wealth is not a zero sum game. The 7 million people on the planet now have more wealth than the handful of cavemen who shared it back in neolithic times.

Historically, the state pension has relied on an increasing working age population to fund increasing withdrawals. It's a pyramid scheme - which will one day collapse. The UK working population cannot continue to grow forever. Birth rates decrease as nations develop, so the gap won't be filled in immigration forever.