Should the triple lock be scrapped in the 6 March Budget?

Grumpy_chap

hugheskevi said:

The_Green_Hornet said:

The OP has their answer.

3.33 The government is also committed to supporting pensioner incomes by maintaining the triple lock. In 2024-25, the full yearly amount of the basic State Pension will be £3,700 higher, in cash terms, than in 2010. That’s £990 more than if it had been uprated by prices, and £1,000 more than if it had been uprated by earnings (since 2010).

HC 560 – Spring Budget 2024 (publishing.service.gov.uk)

I did like the rounding used here - some real effort put in to demonstrate that earnings have fallen in real terms over the last 14 years, rather than simply saying that the State Pension is now £1,000 per year higher than if it had been uprated by either prices or earnings since 2010.

I thought that was really just validating that earnings and prices change, over the long term, to the same degree.  SP, however, gets to double dip on each cycle with the occasional bit of added extra from the 2.5% under-writing.

[Deleted User]

The first change should be to put politicians on the same mixture of state and defined contribution pension as the real world, instead of their legally guaranteed, risk free public, solid gold sector pension, which apparently accretes benefits at five times the rate of private sector ones, achieving in ten years what takes forty-nine elsewhere. Only then will they understand what it's like to have people debating whether you deserve to get back a pension you've contributed to for forty+ years.

BlackKnightMonty

Yes it should be scrapped

Hoenir said:

The_Green_Hornet said:

The OP has their answer.

3.33 The government is also committed to supporting pensioner incomes by maintaining the triple lock. In 2024-25, the full yearly amount of the basic State Pension will be £3,700 higher, in cash terms, than in 2010. That’s £990 more than if it had been uprated by prices, and £1,000 more than if it had been uprated by earnings (since 2010).

HC 560 – Spring Budget 2024 (publishing.service.gov.uk)

Same discussion will pop up over and over prior to every budget. 

With stagnating wages the position gets more and more egregious.

GibbsRule_No3.

No it should be kept

The_Green_Hornet said:

The OP has their answer.

3.33 The government is also committed to supporting pensioner incomes by maintaining the triple lock. In 2024-25, the full yearly amount of the basic State Pension will be £3,700 higher, in cash terms, than in 2010. That’s £990 more than if it had been uprated by prices, and £1,000 more than if it had been uprated by earnings (since 2010).

HC 560 – Spring Budget 2024 (publishing.service.gov.uk)

Surely we knew the rise for 2024-2025 would be Triple Lock it is what happens 2025-2026 and beyond, under a possible Labour Government.

Exodi

Yes it should be scrapped

GibbsRule_No3. said:

The_Green_Hornet said:

The OP has their answer.

3.33 The government is also committed to supporting pensioner incomes by maintaining the triple lock. In 2024-25, the full yearly amount of the basic State Pension will be £3,700 higher, in cash terms, than in 2010. That’s £990 more than if it had been uprated by prices, and £1,000 more than if it had been uprated by earnings (since 2010).

HC 560 – Spring Budget 2024 (publishing.service.gov.uk)

Surely we knew the rise for 2024-2025 would be Triple Lock it is what happens 2025-2026 and beyond, under a possible Labour Government.

Rachel Reeves was doing an interview on LBC this evening, and despite their usual reluctance to give away policy commitments early, she explicitly stated labours commitment to maintaining the triple lock. But in my opinion this is obvious, it's difficult to win without the significant pensioner vote.

GibbsRule_No3.

No it should be kept

Exodi said:

Rachel Reeves was doing an interview on LBC this evening, and despite their usual reluctance to give away policy commitments early, she explicitly stated labours commitment to maintaining the triple lock. But in my opinion this is obvious, it's difficult to win without the significant pensioner vote.

Exodi I reckon 2025-2026 is a shoe-in if Labour get in for that year SP, would not bet on them keeping it after that for the 4 years after.  Is the £12570 PA fixed until 2027? 

GibbsRule_No3.

No it should be kept

Exodi said:

Rachel Reeves was doing an interview on LBC this evening, and despite their usual reluctance to give away policy commitments early, she explicitly stated labours commitment to maintaining the triple lock. But in my opinion this is obvious, it's difficult to win without the significant pensioner vote.

Exodi I reckon 2025-2026 is a shoe-in if Labour get in for that year SP, would not bet on them keeping it after that for the 4 years after.  Is the £12570 PA fixed until 2027? 

ColdIron

No it should be kept

GibbsRule_No3. said:

Exodi said:

Rachel Reeves was doing an interview on LBC this evening, and despite their usual reluctance to give away policy commitments early, she explicitly stated labours commitment to maintaining the triple lock. But in my opinion this is obvious, it's difficult to win without the significant pensioner vote.

Exodi I reckon 2025-2026 is a shoe-in if Labour get in for that year SP, would not bet on them keeping it after that for the 4 years after.  Is the £12570 PA fixed until 2027? 

Fixed up to and including 2027/28

BlackKnightMonty

Yes it should be scrapped

ColdIron said:

GibbsRule_No3. said:

Exodi said:

Rachel Reeves was doing an interview on LBC this evening, and despite their usual reluctance to give away policy commitments early, she explicitly stated labours commitment to maintaining the triple lock. But in my opinion this is obvious, it's difficult to win without the significant pensioner vote.

Exodi I reckon 2025-2026 is a shoe-in if Labour get in for that year SP, would not bet on them keeping it after that for the 4 years after.  Is the £12570 PA fixed until 2027? 

Fixed up to and including 2027/28

Good! You either have all the tax thresholds going up, or none of them.

We certainly don’t need a SP quadruple lock introduced!

nigelbb

BlackKnightMonty said:

nigelbb said:

ewaste said:

nigelbb said:

No, but then nobody is legally earning just £200/week. State pension is half what somebody earns on National Minimum Wage.

NMW at 35hrs a week is around £318.01, 40hrs a week would be £352.40. That's after deductions and the 5% of Qualifying Earnings being paid under AE into a pension. That's if you're lucky enough to have a secure job and 35-40hrs of paid work per week. You'd naturally have various work related expenses e.g. travel costs for getting to and from work.

So a guaranteed £200 a week increasing annually by the triple lock is rather generous. Especially when you've had a lifetime to do what many pensioners preach e.g. work hard, better yourself and save. That's before we get into any of the additional little things like bus passes etc. 

NMW is £11.44/hour from 1st Aptil 2024 which gives a take home pay of £379.33 after deductions including pension contributions. The new state pension is £221.20 from 1st Aptil 2024.or 58% of NMW so just a little more than half.

Under 18 it’s £6.40 an hour.

18-20 it’s £8.60 an hour.

The theory is that you should be paid less because there is some on-the-job training. But it sounds exploitative to me.

as EWaste incates, to earn that wage you undertake all the trappings of work; commuting costs, maybe working shifts, work clothes.

There’s just no way a SP should be at the same level as a working wage!

I didn't say that state pension should be at the same level as NMW. I said it's not much more than half NMW. It's a lot less than median earnings.