Pension chat

Bravepants

housebuyer143 said:

RG2015 said:

Band7 said:

oz0707 said:

Ltd company owners/directors can also get the NI credits for minimal NI payments, but then again they pay a lot of corp tax. It's all one big pot really.

It's actually not all one big pot. State pensions are generally paid from NI contributions only. There is a provision for a Treasury Grant from general taxation if there is a shortfall (as was last the case about 8 years ago) but the NI contributions are administered and accounted for separately from all other tax income.

I wasn't aware of that and have to say I find it surprising.

What else does NI contributions pay for, and are the annual calculations available anywhere?

Chat gpt states:

"According to the UK government, in the fiscal year 2019-2020, NI contributions raised a total of £146 billion. Of this amount, around £106 billion was spent on state pensions, while the remaining £40 billion was spent on other benefits and services, such as Jobseeker's Allowance, Employment and Support Allowance, and Maternity Allowance."

Do you know where Chat GPT gets its information from, or is it not quite clever enough to cite references yet?

housebuyer143

Bravepants said:

housebuyer143 said:

RG2015 said:

Band7 said:

oz0707 said:

Ltd company owners/directors can also get the NI credits for minimal NI payments, but then again they pay a lot of corp tax. It's all one big pot really.

It's actually not all one big pot. State pensions are generally paid from NI contributions only. There is a provision for a Treasury Grant from general taxation if there is a shortfall (as was last the case about 8 years ago) but the NI contributions are administered and accounted for separately from all other tax income.

I wasn't aware of that and have to say I find it surprising.

What else does NI contributions pay for, and are the annual calculations available anywhere?

Chat gpt states:

"According to the UK government, in the fiscal year 2019-2020, NI contributions raised a total of £146 billion. Of this amount, around £106 billion was spent on state pensions, while the remaining £40 billion was spent on other benefits and services, such as Jobseeker's Allowance, Employment and Support Allowance, and Maternity Allowance."

Do you know where Chat GPT gets its information from, or is it not quite clever enough to cite references yet?

I asked it the question in a different way and got this more detailed answer. I asked it to cite it's source but this does seem too much for it at the moment, just said it was from ONS data and government websites.

Between 2010 and 2020, the UK government collected over £600 billion in National Insurance contributions. This money was used to fund a wide range of benefits and services, including:

1. State Pension: The largest portion of NI contributions was used to pay for the State Pension, which accounted for approximately 45% of the total expenditure.

2. National Health Service (NHS): A significant proportion of NI contributions was used to fund the NHS, which provides healthcare services to the UK population. In 2019-2020, around 20% of the total expenditure was spent on the NHS.

3. Employment and Support Allowance: This benefit was the third largest expenditure, accounting for around 5% of the total.

4. Maternity Allowance: This benefit accounted for around 2% of the total expenditure.

5. Jobseeker's Allowance and other benefits: The remaining portion of NI contributions was used to fund other social security benefits and services, including Jobseeker's Allowance and other support for those who are unemployed or on low incomes.

IanManc

Band7 said:

State pensions, social security provisions, health and tax systems are a lot more complex than unverified Wikipedia and a HoC Library paper which ignores a lot of data, such as the actual average retirement ages, and poverty levels across the population. Neither of those two sources will do an incredibly complex subject justice, and nor will an MSE Forum thread that has gone way off topic - not least because of me objecting to the myths and bizarre claims in some of the posts.

Really? You know more than A House of Commons Library research paper on the subject? That is truly laughable.

The two sources I quoted do "an incredibly complex subject" more "justice" than you have. All you have done is patronise other forum users and repeatedly called their postings "myths" and "bizarre" while completely ignoring any information provided to you to show you are wrong. Your response is the forum equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears and chanting "la-la-la-la I can't hear you".

And whingeing about the thread going off topic won't wash either. You have posted more off-topic contributions on this thread than anyone else. 

RG2015

@VNX

Nice one on the thread title change! 

Someone will probably moan now that its on the wrong Board. 

VNX

RG2015 said:

@VNX

Nice one on the thread title change! 

Someone will probably moan now that its on the wrong Board. 

Well the thread after a handful of helpful replies has morphed somehow into a pension discussion so I thought I’d change the subject to a suitable title!

dunstonh

metrobus said:

francoghezzi said:

After I have read that pensions in Uk are very generous I asked for my holidays so I can go on laughing

Exactly these idiots should compare it to the rest of Europe where they retire earlier and get far more.
And it’s nothing to do with BREXIT it’s been the same for the last 25 years.

Comparing "state" pensions is notoriously difficult.   They are all different.

Take Germany, it has a much higher contribution than the UK.    However, in the UK, we use the private sector more for providing pensions.   So, if you take the cost of auto-enrolment and state in the UK and compare it to Germany, then it is broadly similar in terms of cost to the individual and outcome.

If you only look at state alone, then the UK costs less to contribute to but you get less.     

As with most things in life, things are not quite as simple as is often made out.

dealyboy

5.25% is likely to come soon but it will likely be an outlier, unless some significant world event occurs within the next couple of years.

There are three or four candidates that I think could upset the apple-cart but I would put it no higher than 20%.

LHW99

IanManc said:

Band7 said:

metrobus said:

francoghezzi said:

After I have read that pensions in Uk are very generous I asked for my holidays so I can go on laughing

Exactly these idiots should compare it to the rest of Europe where they retire earlier and get far more.
And it’s nothing to do with BREXIT it’s been the same for the last 25 years.

Goodness me, the claims regarding our state pensions get ever more bizarre. Comparing state pension amounts of totally disparate social security, health, social care and tax systems is comparing apples and pears.

To claim that “the rest of Europe retire earlier” is also demonstrably incorrect. Sure, there are some countries with lower state pension ages than ours but there are also some where it is higher. Pensioner poverty in many European countries is running at similar levels as in the UK.

According to this table, no other European country has a higher retirement age than 67. 34 European countries have a lower state pension age. Only five other countries have a retirement age of 67, and for people in the UK the current state retirement age of 67 for anyone born from 1961 onwards is jointly the highest in Europe.  For anyone in the UK born from 1978 onwards the state pension age is 68, making their current state pension age clearly the highest in Europe.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retirement_in_Europe

The research briefing I previously linked to in the House of Commons Library did compare the "totally disparate social security, health, social care and tax systems" of other European countries with ours, finding that the UK devotes a smaller percentage of its GDP to state pensions and pensioner benefits than most other advanced economies and that other countries have greater state provided provision for pensioners.

You seem to enjoy starting your contributions with your trademark "Goodness me" and "I'm afraid" patronising openings, and calling other people's opinions "a myth" or "bizarre" but that doesn't add any weight to your postings, which are, to coin a phrase "demonstrably incorrect".

There is however the aspect that retirement age does not equal state pension age in every country., as this article details

https://www.euronews.com/next/2023/04/06/pension-reform-in-france-which-countries-have-the-lowest-and-highest-retirement-ages-in-eu

We can access private pensions from 10 years below SPA, and could "retire" much earlier if funds / lifestyle allow, as some people on these boards appear to have managed. Autoenrollment is ensuring a majority will have more than just state pension to rely on in future, and may well be expanded further as the years pass.

RG2015

IanManc said:

Band7 said:

State pensions, social security provisions, health and tax systems are a lot more complex than unverified Wikipedia and a HoC Library paper which ignores a lot of data, such as the actual average retirement ages, and poverty levels across the population. Neither of those two sources will do an incredibly complex subject justice, and nor will an MSE Forum thread that has gone way off topic - not least because of me objecting to the myths and bizarre claims in some of the posts.

Really? You know more than A House of Commons Library research paper on the subject? That is truly laughable.

The two sources I quoted do "an incredibly complex subject" more "justice" than you have. All you have done is patronise other forum users and repeatedly called their postings "myths" and "bizarre" while completely ignoring any information provided to you to show you are wrong. Your response is the forum equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears and chanting "la-la-la-la I can't hear you".

And whingeing about the thread going off topic won't wash either. You have posted more off-topic contributions on this thread than anyone else. 

In these days of "fake news" and agenda driven news reporting it is good to have several points of information. Balance is my personal goal as all to often there is no right or wrong but merely shades.

The real problem arises when someone appears to claim that their view is the only view.

Sadly, these days, this results in extreme polarisation with a deafness that cannot be breached. 

Band7

IanManc said:

Band7 said:

State pensions, social security provisions, health and tax systems are a lot more complex than unverified Wikipedia and a HoC Library paper which ignores a lot of data, such as the actual average retirement ages, and poverty levels across the population. Neither of those two sources will do an incredibly complex subject justice, and nor will an MSE Forum thread that has gone way off topic - not least because of me objecting to the myths and bizarre claims in some of the posts.

Really? You know more than A House of Commons Library research paper on the subject? That is truly laughable.

Given that you know just about nothing about my knowledge about state pensions, you are clearly getting carried away by your emotions. I have no intention to entertain you further.